Tax Agreement Sharing

It is important to point out from this judgment that in the event of cost-sharing as a result of the central company`s commitment of a third-party service provider, such an assumption would not be an easy refund and would, as a service, lead to taxing transfers sent abroad. The main feature of the cost-sharing agreement is that the fees are simply reimbursed. This is because these costs are only distributed between the parties, as the parent company does not provide services to benefit from such activities. Table 1 shows the differences between service agreements and cost-sharing agreements. The cost-sharing agreement is generally the result of the need for optimization, efficiency, cost reduction and performance standardization. Within an economic group, a parent company or a company created for this purpose (a common service centre) can agree on the cooperation of certain aspects. This may include the distribution of expenses and costs resulting from activities not related to the core business, such as accounting, marketing and legal services, as well as research and development. Tax Information Exchange Agreements (TIEA) provide for the exchange of information on request in the context of a specific criminal or civil tax investigation or civil tax matter under investigation. [1] A TIEA model has been developed by the OECD Global Forum Working Group on Effective Information Exchange.

Although these are legal contracts justified by the need to optimize costs and standardize procedures in all areas, the tax consequences of the agreements have been discussed. This indicates whether group-to-group operations are located exclusively in Brazil or where these activities are centralized abroad. The legality of intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) has been called into question on the grounds that any agreement between governments binding each government is a treaty. Since the U.S. Constitution does not allow the executive branch to unilaterally implement treaties without Senate approval, many argue that IGAs have no basis in the U.S. Constitution. [3] IGAs were not described or provided for in fatca laws, but were designed and implemented on the basis that it became clear that fatca would fail without it. [4] Finally, it is possible to identify the cost-contribution contract in which a group of companies shares the costs and risks associated with the production or use of assets, services or rights. In general, the distribution of these expenditures is linked to research and development, with intangible law or assets being the equivalent. Under such conditions, there are still doubts and controversies.

However, if there is an effective cost-sharing agreement with the respective controls, we believe that, whether by decision of the Federal Finance Tribunal, the administration or the court, there will be the impossibility of taxation. This agreement, published in April 2002, is not a binding instrument, but includes two models of bilateral agreements. Many bilateral agreements are based on this agreement (see below). There are cases where the cost-sharing agreement includes a central company headquartered abroad. This is a very common agreement between multinationals (MNEs) that make the tax issue a little different, since these are the taxes concerned: (ii) the sums paid under a cost-sharing agreement are reimbursements; and to verify these characteristics, the agreement itself and its implementation by the parties must be taken into account, which could have different tax effects. (iii) service agreements (there is often compensation with a profit margin, while cost-sharing agreements are not entitled to profit, but only to reimbursement). “Given the above, activities made available to the resident corporation by a non-resident corporation must be registered with Siscoserv as part of a cost and expense allocation contract signed between companies of the same economic group involving residents and non-residents of the country: