从Glaxo案看营销性无形资产转让定价规制问题

发布时间：2018-02-25 06:01

本文关键词： 关联企业营销性无形资产转让定价国际重复征税　出处：《法学家》2010年01期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：国际关联企业间营销性无形资产转让定价规制主要涉及营销性无形资产的范围界定、所有权归属和价值回报确定等问题。美国Glaxo案件的争议反映出有关国家转让定价税制在这些问题上的立法与实践存在分歧,经合组织的《转让定价准则》也缺乏相应的明确指导规定。由于营销性无形资产的构成和价值确定具有高度的事实依附性,并不存在一种可普遍适用于各种营销性无形资产转让交易的认定标准和规则。为保证转让定价税制实施的正当性目标实现,防止国际税收争议发生和消除国际重复征税风险,应尽可能采用双边或多边预约定价协议方式规制国际关联企业营销性无形资产转让定价交易。关联企业应尽可能在交易合同中对营销功能的履行、风险的分担和营销性无形资产的价值回报事项做出具体的规定,并注意保存充分的同期资料证明文件。
[Abstract]:The scope of international transfer of intangible assets among affiliated enterprises marketing pricing regulation mainly involves the marketing of intangible assets, ownership and value determined. The United States Glaxo the dispute cases reflect the differences of transfer pricing tax system of the countries concerned in the legislation on these issues and practice, "the OECD transfer pricing guidelines > also lack the clear guidelines. Because the composition and value of marketing intangible assets determine the fact is highly dependent, there is not a generally applicable to a variety of marketing intangible assets transfer transaction identification standards and rules. In order to ensure the legitimacy of the implementation of the transfer pricing tax system implementation, to prevent and eliminate the occurrence of international tax dispute the risk of international double taxation, should as far as possible by using bilateral or multilateral advanced pricing agreement way to regulate international association of enterprise marketing of intangible assets Transfer pricing transactions. Affiliated enterprises should make specific provisions for the implementation of marketing functions, risk sharing and value return of marketing intangible assets as far as possible in transaction contracts, and pay attention to the preservation of sufficient documents for the same period.

【作者单位】：厦门大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金项目“经济全球化进程中的税收国际协调法律问题研究”(03BFX047)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D996.1

【相似文献】