This study attempted to analyze the regulatory framework of the two countries, Italy, and Japan by first covering and understanding key economic approaches to transfer pricing. Following their profiles which are meant to accurately reflect the current status of the country’s legislation and illustrate the extent to which their policies adhere to the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines. Furthermore, we analyze the actions relevant to TP that would improve cross-border tax rule coherence, tighten substance requirements, and promote transparency in order to resolve BEPS offered by the OECD/G20. Finally, we reviewed Italy and Japan's implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project and determine that Italy’s competent authority is struggling more than Japan’s, as a consequence of having more new MAP cases submitted yearly and being under-resourced. As a result, after taking into consideration all the aspects evaluated in this study, we are able to say that even though there is one Transfer Pricing Guideline that governs all the OECD members including Italy and Japan, the result of its implementation is different in each country.
Il presente lavoro ha avuto lo scopo di comprendere il quadro normativo di due Paesi, Italia e Giappone. Lo studio ha analizzato in un primo momento gli approcci economici chiave ai prezzi di trasferimento per arrivare in un secondo momento ai profili che illustrano accuratamente lo stato attuale della legislazione del Paese e la misura in cui le loro politiche aderiscono alle Linee guida dell'OCSE sui prezzi di trasferimento. Inoltre, si è indagato su quali potrebbero essere le azioni rilevanti per TP offerte dall'OCSE/G20 che andrebbero a migliorare la coerenza delle norme fiscali transfrontaliere, inasprirebbero i requisiti sulle sostanze e promuoverebbero la trasparenza al fine di risolvere il BEPS. Infine, è stato esaminata l’implementazione da parte dei due Paesi del progetto OCSE/G20 BEPS e stabilito che l'autorità competente italiana mostra una maggiore difficoltà rispetto a quella giapponese, gap dovuto alla carenza di risorse e al numero di nuovi casi MAP presentati ogni anno. Pertanto, dopo aver preso in considerazione tutti gli aspetti oggetto di studio si può affermare che, nonostante esista una Transfer Pricing Guideline che disciplina tutti i membri dell'OCSE compresi Italia e Giappone, il risultato del livello di implementazione è diverso in ciascun Paese.
UNO STUDIO COMPARATO DI TRANSFER PRICING INTERNAZIONALE: ITALIA E GIAPPONE
BUSSOLETTI, LOLITA
2021/2022
Abstract
This study attempted to analyze the regulatory framework of the two countries, Italy, and Japan by first covering and understanding key economic approaches to transfer pricing. Following their profiles which are meant to accurately reflect the current status of the country’s legislation and illustrate the extent to which their policies adhere to the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines. Furthermore, we analyze the actions relevant to TP that would improve cross-border tax rule coherence, tighten substance requirements, and promote transparency in order to resolve BEPS offered by the OECD/G20. Finally, we reviewed Italy and Japan's implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project and determine that Italy’s competent authority is struggling more than Japan’s, as a consequence of having more new MAP cases submitted yearly and being under-resourced. As a result, after taking into consideration all the aspects evaluated in this study, we are able to say that even though there is one Transfer Pricing Guideline that governs all the OECD members including Italy and Japan, the result of its implementation is different in each country.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Tesi magistrale-Lolita Bussoletti.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
1.16 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.16 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in UNITESI sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12075/10111