rec9Ogoq6fM1ssrfj

根据税务专家对商品及服务税（GST）实施情况的评估，转让定价这一老问题未来可能会对该体系造成冲击。商品及服务税（GST）的实施旨在实现“一个国家，一种税”，这是该国历史上规模最大的间接税改革。

事实上，随着GST的实施，常规转让定价交易面临着诸多挑战。在本文中，我们为您列举了其中一些挑战，助您抢占先机！

1. 关联方交易的转让定价规定

1.1 指定国际交易

• 《所得税法》针对关联方之间的指定国际交易（若其中一方位于印度境外）以及关联方之间的指定国内交易，制定了专门条款。
• 许多跨国公司通过将利润从高税率国家转移到低税率国家来规避所得税。
• 转让定价规定旨在确保不会通过将利润转移至印度境外来规避印度所得税。
• 因此，交易定价规定确保关联方之间的国际交易均按独立交易价格进行，即与非关联方交易的价格持平。

1.2 指定国内交易

• 对于国内交易，除非其中一方出现亏损或处于较低税率区间，否则交易价格的变动通常不会产生税务责任影响。
• 然而，印度某些主体有资格享受税收优惠，即在一定期限内无需缴纳所得税，或允许扣除更高额度的费用（如实际发生费用的150%或200%）。因此，某些主体试图通过将利润转移给此类实体来规避所得税。
• 为避免此类行为，转让定价规定适用于特定的国内交易。
• 国内转让定价规定确保交易按独立交易价格进行。

1.3 独立交易价格的确定

• 根据《所得税法》第92C条，计算独立交易价格的方法如下：
  • 可比非受控价格（CUP）法；
  • 转售价格法；
  • 成本加成法；
  • 利润分割法；
  • 交易净利润法；

• 应选择并应用最合适的方法来计算独立交易价格。

2. GST下的关联方交易

• 2017年《中央商品及服务税法》（CGST Act）第15条规定了商品和服务价值的确定方法。
• 根据第15条，若关联方之间发生供应，则供应价值应为：
  • 该供应的公开市场价值；
  • 若无公开市场价值，则为同类同质供应的价值；
  • 若无法根据(a)或(b)项确定价值，则应根据第30条或第31条的规定确定。

• 若接收方有资格获得进项税抵扣，则发票上申报的价值应视为公开市场价值。
• 此外，根据《中央商品及服务税法》附表一，关联方之间无对价的供应仍被视为供应，因此需缴纳GST。
• GST下关联方的范围很广，也涵盖了国内交易。

3. 转让定价规定与GST之间的矛盾

• 两部法律的宗旨都是为了遏制印度的避税行为。然而，这些规定相互交织的性质导致了一些相互矛盾的解释和争议。
• 两种税法在以下方面视角不同：
  • 对于任何与支出相关的交易，所得税部门倾向于将独立交易价格定得较低，因为这会增加印度实体的利润，从而增加其在印度的所得税负。
  • 而商品及服务税当局则倾向于将其定得较高，因为这会增加服务进口的GST税收收入。

• 因此，在所得税和商品及服务税下，任何供应价值的确定可能会出现截然相反的方向。

• 有些交易需要纳税人仔细规划。

3.1 外国母公司授予印度子公司免费使用许可/品牌名称

• 外国公司通常允许其印度子公司免费使用其外国公司的许可/品牌名称，即以零成本方式使用。
• 因此，由于没有货币价值，此类交易不会记录在账簿中。
• 根据2017年《中央商品及服务税法》附表一，关联方之间无对价的供应被视为供应，因此需缴纳GST。为计算GST税负，价值应根据《中央商品及服务税法》第15条确定。
• 因此，纳税人将被要求确定价值并据此缴纳GST。
• 然而，如果考虑此类交易的价值，则会导致应纳税所得额减少或亏损增加，因此根据1961年《所得税法》第92(3)条，转让定价规定不适用。
• 不过，所得税当局可能会将为GST目的所做的估值视为独立交易价格，并可能要求扣缴税款（TDS）。

3.2 向印度子公司收取的用于使用外国公司许可/品牌名称的版权费/许可费/品牌费

• In cases, where a fee is charged for granting use of license fee/ brand fee, Income Tax Officers would like to determine a lower price as would lead to higher profits and higher income tax liability.
• Whereas, GST officials would like to determine higher price as it would lead to higher GST Collection on import of service.

3.3 Deemed International Transactions

• 3.3 视同国际交易

例如：

1. A holding Company in the USA has a subsidiary in India.
2. USA company entered into an agreement with an independent USA company wherein various terms of supply of goods to Indian Subsidiary are determined.
3. Such USA Company entered into an agreement with Indian Subsidiary for supply of goods in accordance with terms determined by such USA Company and Holding Company.
4. Therefore, as per Section 92B(2), a transaction between Indian Subsidiary and Independent USA Company is a Deemed to be entered between associated enterprises.

• However, such a transaction is not considered as a transaction between related parties under GST law.
• In such a scenario, access of Form 3CEB to GST authorities may expose such transactions to an arm’s length testing from GST perspective, which would have otherwise not been under that ambit.

3.4 True-up/ True-down adjustments:

• To determine Arm's Length price, various adjustments are made to initial transaction value.
• Since these adjustments are not factored in the initial price of the transaction, an additional GST liability may arise in case of subvention payments.

4. Possible solution to contradiction in valuation under GST and Transfer Pricing 

• Keeping in mind the challenges mentioned above, it is quite natural to ask “how to resolve these issues?”. Well, according to analysts, the indirect tax system is time-bound as a time of supply, and undervaluation regulations play a significant part in price computation.
• Relief to taxpayers is since three years, the tax department has been working hard to settle transfer pricing difficulties by signing Advance Pricing Agreements (APA) with multinationals.

4.1 Advance Price Agreements (“APA”)

• As per OECD transfer pricing guidelines, APA (or arrangements) is an arrangement that determines, in advance of controlled transactions, an appropriate set of criteria for the determination of the transfer pricing for those transactions over a fixed period. 
• In other words, an APA is an agreement between board and taxpayer/ any person for determining ALP for specifying the manner of determining ALP in relation to international transaction.
• Section 92CC of income tax act, 1961 enables the board to enter into APA with any person for determining ALP or manner of determining ALP in relation to international transaction.
• In all fairness to the taxpayer, a price accepted for transfer pricing by the income tax department should ideally also be accepted by the GST department considering both are central government bodies. 
• Therefore, if a taxpayer has concluded an APA agreement on its transfer pricing policies, exposure on the GST front may be reduced to a great extent.

结论

Every coin has two sides, so does GST and Transfer pricing combined. The possible solution to the challenges can be further explored to figure out an easier and more fruitful outcome.