natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Figur 1 er baseret på beskrivelsen i transfer pricing-rapporten og skal illustrere den del af Starbucks' struktur, der er relevant for denne afgørelse [29].
SMBV buys the green coffee beans from SCTC, a designated supplier [22].
Figur 1
The beans for the EMEA market are roasted and packaged in the Netherlands by SMBV.
Kafferistning royalty royalty for mærket
SMBV licenses a subset of IP from Alki LP, which is not mentioned in the functional analysis, but described in a separate section on the EMEA market and Netherlands operations as ‘necessary to utilise the coffee roasting manufacturing process and the right to supply coffee to [D]evelopers.
Ristede kaffebønner
In return [SMBV] remits a royalty to Alki LP for the licensed IP’ [23].
Grønne kaffebønner
That coffee roasting related IP consists, in particular, of roasting curves, which according to the transfer pricing report dictates the temperature and the length of time required to complete the roasting process.
andre færdigt forarbejdede produkter: fødevarer, te, krus, Frappuccino osv.
According to the transfer pricing report, SMBV employed [40-60] people, of which [20-30] perform supply chain operations including procurement, planning, logistics and distribution planning [24].
andre produkter: fødevarer, te, krus osv.
SMBV has a distribution centre in the United Kingdom (hereinafter: ‘UK’) operated under contract by a third party [25].
Tredjepartss ælgere
SMBV has a supply and logistics agreement with a third party in the Netherlands, whereby the third party purchases inventory for resale to developers at arranged prices [26].
Starbucks- butikker (EMEA)
SMBV also has a relationship with a consignment manufacturer, [unaffiliated manufacturing company 1].
Ifølge transfer pricing-rapporten valgte skatterådgiveren TNMM-metoden (»transactional net margin method«) [30] til at estimere det armslængdevederlag, som SMBV skulle have, frem for andre transfer pricing-metoder, fordi »nettoavancen under de specifikke forhold, der gør sig gældende for Starbucks', er mindre påvirket af transaktionsforskelle og funktionsforskelle, end det er tilfældet med de parametre, der anvendes i de helt traditionelle metoder« [31].
[Unaffiliated manufacturing company 1] mainly produces [a trademark registered coffee product] powder for the Starbucks [trademark registered coffee] product.
For en mere detaljeret beskrivelse af valg af metode og af peer-analysen i transfer pricing-rapporten henvises til betragtning 40 til 58 i åbningsafgørelsen.
SMBV is responsible [27] for managing this toll manufacturing relationship [28] and sells the majority of the product produced by [unaffiliated manufacturing company 1] to Starbucks' US resident companies.
Ved anvendelsen af TNMM på SMBV's ristningsaktiviteter anså skatterådgiveren det relevante grundlag [32] for nettooverskudsindikatoren for at være omkostningerne ved tjenesteydelserne ydet af SMBV i overensstemmelse med kostpris plus avance-metoden (»Cost+-metoden«), der betragtes som en egnet metodologi for forsyningskæde- og fremstillingstjenester.
Figure 1 is based on the description of the transfer pricing report to illustrate the part of the structure of Starbucks which is relevant for this Decision [29].
Tillægget beregnes imidlertid kun for de omkostninger, hvor SMBV, ifølge skatterådgiveren, tilfører værdi.
Figure 1
I transfer pricing-rapporten er disse omkostninger angivet som de vigtigste driftsomkostninger, såsom omkostninger til personale og afskrivninger, men ikke COGS.
Structure of Starbucks based on the description in the transfer pricing report Green beans
Til at bestemme den rette »armslængdelønsomhed« for de aktiviteter, der udføres af SMBV, søgte skatterådgiveren efter virksomheder, der opererer i Europa med lignende funktioner og risici.
Starbucks Coffee Trading SARL (Switzerland)
En søgning i Amadeus-databasen [33] på NACE Rev 1.1 kode 1586 — Forarbejdning af te og kaffe med henblik på at finde virksomheder aktive inden for handel med kaffe (køb og salg af kaffe, der ikke forarbejdes af virksomheden selv, blev ikke anset for sammenlignelig) efterfulgt af en eliminering foretaget af skatterådgiveren på basis af yderligere finansielle udvælgelseskriterier og en manuel screening [34], resulterede til sidst i 20 virksomheder, der potentielt var sammenlignelige [35].
Third party vendors
For at korrigere for denne forskel og angiveligt øge pålideligheden af sammenligningen udførte skatterådgiveren en første justering, der skulle tage højde for, at der i det avancetillæg, der foresloges beregnet af SMBV's omkostningsgrundlag, ikke indgår nogen omkostningskomponent for grønne kaffebønner.
Starbucks Coffee Shops (EMEA)
Desuden afspejlede de sammenlignelige virksomheders indtjening ifølge skatterådgiveren også indtjeningen på et omkostningsgrundlag, der omfatter sådanne råvarer.
Starbucks Manufacturing EMEA BV (Netherlands)
Derfor foretog skatterådgiveren en omkostningskorrektion for råvarerne for at ændre det samlede avancetillæg [36] i udsnittet af sammenlignelige virksomheder.
Starbucks Coffee EMEA BV (Netherlands)
Skatterådgiveren anførte, at denne justering hang sammen med, hvad skatterådgiveren refererer til som at »tage adkomst til råvarerne«.
Alki (UK)
Fra overskuddet i hver virksomhed i udsnittet fratrak skatterådgiveren helt konkret dens skønnede råvarepriser ganget med 12-måneders Euribor plus 50 basispoint.
royalty for brand
Kombinationen af disse to justeringer sænkede det anslåede vederlag fra en medianværdi på 7,8 % af de samlede omkostninger til en skønnet medianværdi på 9,9 % af driftsomkostningerne [37].
royalty for roasting
Et (afrundet) avancetillæg på [9-12] % af driftsomkostningerne blev på det grundlag anset for at afspejle et armslængdeavancetillæg for SMBV's udførelse af ristning og tilknyttede aktiviteter i forsyningskæden inden for virksomhedens koncerninterne transaktioner.
According to the transfer pricing report, the transactional net margin method (hereinafter: ‘TNMM’ [30]) was selected by the tax advisor to estimate an arm's-length remuneration due to SMBV over other transfer pricing methods, because, ‘in the specific set of Starbucks' circumstances; the net margin is less affected by transactional differences and functional differences, as in the case with measures employed in standard traditional methods’ [31].
Beskrivelse af OECD's retningslinjer for transfer pricing
For a more detailed description of the choice of the method and of the peer analysis in the transfer pricing report, see recitals 40 to 58 of the Opening Decision.
Organisationen for Økonomisk Samarbejde og Udvikling, OECD (herefter benævnt »OECD«), har opstillet vejledende retningslinjer til sine medlemslande om beskatning.
In applying the TNMM to SMBV's roasting activities, the tax advisor considered the relevant base [32] for the net profit indicator to be the costs of the services rendered by SMBV, in line with the cost plus method, which is considered an appropriate methodology for supply chain and manufacturing services.
OECD's retningslinjer for transfer pricing findes i OECD's Transfer Pricing Guidelines (herefter benævnt »OECD's TP-retningslinjer«), der ikke er juridisk bindende, men udstikker retningslinjer for transfer pricing.
However, the mark-up is only applied to those costs where, according to the tax advisor, SMBV adds value.
Ved transferpriser forstås de priser, der anvendes ved kommercielle transaktioner mellem forskellige dele af den samme koncern.
The transfer pricing report lists those costs as main operating costs, such as cost of personnel and depreciation, excluding COGS.
Multinationale selskaber har et økonomisk incitament til at allokere så lidt overskud som muligt til jurisdiktioner, hvor beskatningen af dette overskud er højere.
To determine the appropriate arm's-length range of profitability for the activities performed by SMBV, the tax advisor conducted a search to identify companies operating in Europe with similar functions and risks.
Det vil kunne føre til uforholdsmæssigt høje afregningspriser der ikke bør accepteres som grundlag for beregning af den skattepligtige indkomst.
A comparable companies search in the Amadeus database [33] using the primary NACE Rev 1.1 code 1586 — Processing of tea and coffee to identify companies engaged in the trade of coffee (the buying and selling of coffee not processed by the company itself were not deemed comparable) followed by elimination through the use of additional financial selection criteria and a manual screening by the tax advisor [34], ultimately resulted in 20 companies as potentially comparable [35].
For at undgå dette problem bør skattemyndighederne kun acceptere transferpriser mellem koncernselskaber, når disse priser svarer til, hvad de ville modtage, hvis de var aftalt mellem uafhængige selskaber, der har forhandlet under lignende omstændigheder på armslængdeafstand [38].
The net profit indicator calculated for each company was a mark-up on total costs, which is defined as operating profit divided by total operating costs.
Dette kaldes »armslængdeprincippet«.
The median of the unadjusted mark-up on total costs for those companies from 2001 to 2005 was estimated at 7,8 %.
De autoritative retningslinjer for armslængde-princippet findes i artikel 9, stk. 1, i OECD's modeloverenskomst om beskatning, der danner grundlag for bilaterale skatteaftaler mellem OECD-medlemslande og et stigende antal tredjelande.
However, according to the tax advisor, this set of comparable companies includes full-fledged manufacturers that typically perform more functions and incur risk relating to their raw materials.
I artikel 9 hedder det: »[Where] conditions are made or imposed between the two [associated] enterprises in their commercial or financial relations which differ from those which would be made between independent enterprises, then any profits which would, but for those conditions, have accrued to one of the enterprises, but, by reason of those conditions, have not so accrued, may be included in the profits of that enterprise and taxed accordingly.«
To correct for this difference and to allegedly increase the reliability of the comparison, the tax advisor performed a first adjustment to account for the fact that the proposed application of the mark-up to SMBV's cost-base does not include a cost component for green coffee beans.
Retningslinjerne for transfer pricing blev vedtaget den 27. juni 1995 af OECD's udvalg for fiskale anliggender (herefter benævnt »OECD's retningslinjer fra 1995« [39]), som var genstand for en anbefaling fra OECD's råd [40].
Additionally, the comparable companies' returns would, according to the tax advisor, reflect a return on a cost base that includes such raw materials.
Den seneste udgave af OECD's retningslinjer for transfer pricing blev vedtaget i juli 2010 (herefter benævnt »OECD's retningslinjer af 2010«) [41].
Therefore, a raw materials cost adjustment was applied by the tax advisor to modify the total cost mark-up [36] obtained from the comparable companies set.
Da de er ikke-bindende, opfordres skattemyndighederne i OECD-medlemslandene blot til at følge retningslinjerne.
The tax advisor indicated that this adjustment is associated with what the tax advisor refers to as ‘taking title to the raw materials’.
Men generelt vil OECD's retningslinjer fungere som fokuspunkt og smitte tydeligt af på skattepraksis i OECD-landene (og endog i lande, der ikke er medlemmer).
Concretely, the tax advisor subtracted from the profit of each company in the set their estimated price of raw material multiplied by 12-month EURIBOR plus 50 basis points.
I mange OECD-medlemslande har disse retningslinjer fået retskraft eller fungerer som referencegrundlag ved fortolkningen af indenlandsk skattelovgivning.
The combination of those two adjustments lowered the estimated remuneration from a median of 7,8 % on total costs to an estimated median of 9,9 % on operating costs [37].
Når Kommissionen henviser til OECD's retningslinjer i nærværende afgørelse, er det, fordi disse retningslinjer er en eksisterende håndbog i transfer pricing, som udmønter diskussionerne mellem eksperter inden for rammerne af OECD og uddyber teknikker, hvis sigte er at behandle fælles udfordringer ved anvendelsen af armslængdeprincippet på konkrete situationer.
A (rounded) mark-up of [9-12] % of operating costs was considered on that basis to reflect an arm's-length mark-up for the provision of roasting services and associated supply chain activities by SMBV for its intra-group transactions.
OECD's retningslinjer giver derfor skattemyndigheder og multinationale selskaber nyttig vejledning i anvendelsen af armslængdeprincippet.
Description of OECD guidance on transfer pricing
De indfanger også den internationale konsensus om transfer pricing.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (hereinafter the ‘OECD’) OECD provides guidance on taxation for its member countries.
Transfer pricing-metoder
The OECD's guidance on transfer pricing can be found in its Transfer Pricing Guidelines (hereinafter the ‘OECD TP Guidelines’), which is a non-binding legal instrument providing guidance on transfer prices.
OECD's retningslinjer fra såvel 1995 som 2010 beskriver fem metoder til estimering af en armslængdeprissætning af transaktioner og overskudsallokering mellem selskaber i samme koncern: i) den fri markedspris' metode (herefter benævnt »CUP«), ii) Cost+-metoden, iii) videresalgsprismetoden, iv) TNMM og v) profit split-metoden.
Transfer prices refer to prices charged for commercial transactions between various parts of the same corporate group.
Begge sæt retningslinjer skelner også mellem traditionelle transaktionsmetoder (de tre første metoder) og metoder med transaktionsbestemt overskud (de to sidste metoder).
Multinational companies have a financial incentive to allocate as little profit as possible to jurisdictions where those profits are subject to higher taxation.
Desuden forklarer de begge, at multinationale selskaber fortsat kan vælge at anvende metoder, der ikke er beskrevet i disse retningslinjer, til at fastsætte transfer pricing, forudsat de overholder armslængdeprincippet.
This could lead to exaggerated transfer prices which should not be accepted as a basis for calculating taxable income.
I OECD's retningslinjer fra 1995 udtales udtrykkelig præference for traditionelle transaktionsmetoder, såsom CUP, frem for metoder med transaktionsbestemt overskud, såsom TNMM, som et middel til at fastslå, om transfer pricing er armslængde.
To avoid this problem, tax administrations should only accept transfer prices between intra-group companies that are remunerated as if they were agreed to by independent companies negotiating under comparable circumstances at arm's length [38].
Punkt 3.49 i OECD's retningslinjer fra 1995 fastslår følgende: »Traditional transaction methods are to be preferred over transactional profit methods as a means of establishing whether a transfer price is at arm's length, i.e. whether there is a special condition affecting the level of profits between associated enterprises.
This is known as the ‘arm's-length principle’.
To date, practical experience has shown that in the majority of cases, it is possible to apply traditional transaction methods.«
The authoritative statement of the arm's-length principle is found in paragraph 1 of Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention, which forms the basis of bilateral tax treaties involving OECD member countries and an increasing number of non-member countries.
I denne forbindelse hedder det i punkt 2.3 i OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010: »As a result, where, taking account of the criteria described at paragraph 2.2, a traditional transaction method and a transactional profit method can be applied in an equally reliable manner, the traditional transaction method is preferable to the transactional profit«.
Article 9 provides: ‘[Where] conditions are made or imposed between the two [associated] enterprises in their commercial or financial relations which differ from those which would be made between independent enterprises, then any profits which would, but for those conditions, have accrued to one of the enterprises, but, by reason of those conditions, have not so accrued, may be included in the profits of that enterprise and taxed accordingly’.
CUP og TNMM er relevante for nærværende afgørelse og er derfor beskrevet nærmere i betragtning 71 til 75.
On 27 June 1995, the OECD's Committee on Fiscal Affairs adopted transfer pricing guidelines (hereinafter: the ‘1995 OECD TP Guidelines’ [39]) which were the object of a Recommendation of the OECD Council [40].
CUP-metoden sammenligner prisen anvendt ved overførsel af ejendom eller tjenesteydelser i en kontrolleret transaktion (dvs. en transaktion mellem to selskaber, der er indbyrdes forbundne) til den pris, der forlanges for overdragelse af ejendom eller tjenesteydelser i en tilsvarende ukontrolleret transaktion (dvs. en transaktion mellem selskaber, der ikke er indbyrdes forbundne, men uafhængige af hinanden), udført under sammenlignelige omstændigheder.
The latest version of the OECD TP Guidelines was adopted in July 2010 (hereinafter the ‘2010 OECD TP Guidelines’) [41].
Fordi TNMM ikke sætter en pris for individuelle transaktioner, vil en enheds skattepligtige overskud estimeret ved hjælp af TNMM måske ikke have en direkte indvirkning på det skattepligtige overskud for en anden enhed i samme koncern.
Given their non-binding nature, the tax administrations of the OECD member countries are simply encouraged to follow the Guidelines.
Metoden bruges altså anderledes end f.eks. CUP-metoden, hvor transfer pricing fastsætter prisen for en bestemt vare eller tjenesteydelse, der herefter med det samme beløb indregnes i det skattepligtige overskud for det selskab i koncernen, der sælger, og det selskab i koncernen, der køber den pågældende vare eller tjenesteydelse.
However, in general, the OECD TP Guidelines serve as a focal point and exert a clear influence on the tax practices of OECD member (and even non-member) countries.
Brugen af TNMM er ofte knyttet sammen med punkt 3.18 i OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010, ifølge hvilken den »testede part«, dvs. den part i transaktionen, som en finansiel indikator (avance på omkostninger, bruttoavance og nettooverskudsindikator) testes på, i princippet bør være det selskab, der har den mindst komplekse funktion.
Moreover, in numerous OECD member countries those Guidelines have been given the force of law or serve as a reference for the purpose of interpreting domestic tax law.
Punkt 3.18 i OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010 indeholder følgende detaljerede anbefaling: »When applying a cost plus, resale price or transactional net margin method as described in Chapter II, it is necessary to choose the party to the transaction for which a financial indicator (mark-up on costs, gross margin, or net profit indicator) is tested.
To the extent the Commission cites the OECD TP Guidelines in the present Decision, it does so because those guidelines are an existing manual in the area of transfer pricing that are the result of expert discussions in the context of the OECD and elaborate on techniques aimed to address common challenges of the application of the arm's-length principle to concrete situations.
The choice of the tested party should be consistent with the functional analysis of the transaction.
The OECD TP Guidelines therefore provide useful guidance to tax administrations and multinational enterprises on the application of the arm's-length principle.
As a general rule, the tested party is the one to which a transfer pricing method can be applied in the most reliable manner and for which the most reliable comparables can be found, i.e. it will most often be the one that has the less complex functional analysis« [42].
They also capture the international consensus on transfer pricing.
Dette punkt i OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010 fortolkes ofte af skatterådgivere i forbindelse med transaktioner mellem to forbundne selskaber, som om det er tilladt at estimere armslængderentabilitet for kun ét af dem, dvs. det mindre komplekse, og allokere alt andet overskud, der er konstateret i regnskaberne, til det andet selskab, der anses for mere komplekst.
Transfer pricing methods
Dette gøres, uanset om det selskab, der betragtes som mere komplekst, optjener et armslængdevederlag som følge af transaktioner mellem sig selv og det mindre komplekse selskab, og uanset det faktum, at OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010 ikke synes at ophæve kravet om, at deraf følgende transaktioner skal armslængdeprissættes, når man støtter sig på punkt 3.18 i OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010.
Both the 1995 and the 2010 OECD TP Guidelines describe five methods to approximate an arm's-length pricing of transactions and profit allocation between companies of the same corporate group: (i) the comparable uncontrolled price method (hereinafter ‘CUP’); (ii) the cost plus method; (iii) the resale minus method; (iv) the TNMM and (v) the transactional profit split method.
Armslængdespænd
Both Guidelines also draw a distinction between traditional transaction methods (the first three methods) and transactional profit methods (the last two methods).
Hvis spændet omfatter et stort antal observationer, kan statistiske værktøjer, der tager højde for en fordeling af gennemsnit til at indsnævre spændet (f.eks. det interkvartile interval eller andre percentiler), ifølge OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010 i sådanne tilfælde medvirke til at øge pålideligheden af analysen.
In this regard, paragraph 2.3 of the 2010 OECD TP Guidelines provides: ‘As a result, where, taking account of the criteria described at paragraph 2.2, a traditional transaction method and a transactional profit method can be applied in an equally reliable manner, the traditional transaction method is preferable to the transactional profit method.’
I praksis mener skatterådgivere ofte, at alle resultater i det interkvartile interval er acceptable og lige korrekte.
The CUP and the TNMM are relevant for the present Decision and are therefore described in more detail in recitals 71 to 75.
Desuden bør skattemyndighederne, ifølge punkt 3.62 i OECD's retningslinjer fra 2010 [44], når de foretager tilpasninger af skatteyderens prisfastsættelse, der ligger uden for et korrekt spænd, i tilfælde af sammenlignelighedsproblemer bruge en fordeling af gennemsnit (f.eks. median, middel eller vægtede gennemsnit og lignende) til at bestemme det relevante punkt i spændet.
The CUP method compares the price charged for the transfer of property or services in a controlled transaction (i.e. a transaction between two enterprises that are associated enterprises with respect to each other) to the price charged for the transfer of property or services in a comparable uncontrolled transaction (i.e. a transaction between enterprises that are independent enterprises with respect to each other), conducted under comparable circumstances.
Beskrivelse af de væsentligste regnskabsmæssige og finansielle termer i transfer pricing-analysen
The TNMM is one of the ‘indirect methods’ to approximate an arm's-length pricing of transactions and profit allocation between companies of the same corporate group.
Transfer pricing-analysen i den transfer pricing-rapport, der indgik i SMBV's APA-anmodning, indeholder en række regnskabsmæssige termer og finansielle overskudsindikatorer.
It approximates what would be an arm's-length profit for an entire activity, rather than for identified transactions.
En kort oversigt over finansielle indikatorer og regnskabsmæssige begreber, der ofte anvendes i forbindelse med transfer pricing-vurderinger og er relevante for den foreliggende sag, er forklaret nedenfor.
It does not seek to establish the price of goods sold, but estimates the profits independent companies could be expected to make on an activity, such as the activity of selling goods.
Væsentligste poster på resultatopgørelsen (ikkefinansielle virksomheder)
It does this by taking an appropriate base (‘a profit level indicator’), such as costs, turnover or fixed investment, and applying a profit ratio reflecting that observed in comparable uncontrolled transactions to that base.