{{vm.title}}
25{{vm.includesText}}
{{item}}
{{vm.selectText}}
{{ vm.welcomeLabel.trim() }},
{{ vm.userName }}
{{ vm.text }}
{{vm.newUser1}} {{vm.newUser2}} {{vm.newUser3}} {{vm.newUser4}}
{{ vm.unknownUser }}
{{ vm.title }}
{{ vm.title }}
{{ vm.title }}
- {{ vm.siteSelectorList.flyout.cell1.heading }} {{ site.countryLocale }} {{ vm.siteSelectorList.flyout.cell1.global.countryLocale }}
{{ vm.closeTabLabel }}
- {{ vm.flyout.cell2.title }} {{ vm.flyout.cell2.newTabAllow }} {{ vm.flyout.cell2.title }}
- {{ vm.flyout.cell3.title }} {{ vm.flyout.cell3.newTabAllow }} {{ vm.flyout.cell3.title }}
- {{ vm.flyout.cell1.viewAll.label }} {{ vm.flyout.cell1.viewAll.newTabAllow }} {{ vm.flyout.cell1.viewAll.label }}
OECD Reports Success in Mitigating Harmful Tax Regimes
OECD Reports Success in Mitigating Harmful Tax Regimes
OECD checks in on tax regimes that have agreed to reduce harmful tax practices
The OECD reports significant progress in the international effort to curb harmful tax practices and ensure that preferential tax regimes align taxation with substance, according to a newly released progress report.
The OECD report—Harmful Tax Practices - 2018 Progress Report on Preferential Regimes—provides an update on just under 60 tax regimes and looks at whether they have delivered on their commitment to comply with the international standard on harmful tax practices (i.e., Action 5 of the base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) project).
The OECD has now reviewed 255 regimes from 70 jurisdictions since the start of the BEPS project.
Key conclusions
Among other things, this report concludes that:
- Forty-four regimes have delivered on their commitment to make legislative changes to repeal or amend the regime
- All intellectual property (IP) regimes that were identified in the 2015 BEPS Action 5 report are now "not harmful" and consistent with the nexus approach
- Three new or replacement regimes were found "not harmful" because they were designed to meet the BEPS Action 5 standard (Barbados, Curaçao, and Panama)
- Four regimes were found to be "out of scope" or not operational (Malaysia, the Seychelles and two regimes of Thailand), and two further commitments were given to make legislative changes to repeal or amend a regime (Malaysia and Trinidad & Tobago)
- One regime was found potentially harmful but not actually harmful (Montserrat)
- Three regimes have been found potentially harmful (all in Thailand).
Background
BEPS Action 5 "revamps" the work on harmful tax practices with a focus on improving transparency, including compulsory spontaneous exchange on rulings related to preferential regimes, and on requiring substantial activity for preferential regimes such as intellectual property (IP) regimes.
For more information, contact your KPMG adviser.
Information is current to February 05, 2019. The information contained in this publication is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act upon such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. For more information, contact KPMG's National Tax Centre at 416.777.8500
© 2020 KPMG LLP, a Canada limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.
KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”) is a Swiss entity. Member firms of the KPMG network of independent firms are affiliated with KPMG International. KPMG International provides no client services. No member firm has any authority to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member firm vis-à-vis third parties, nor does KPMG International have any such authority to obligate or bind any member firm.
