1、本科毕业论文（设计） 外 文 翻 译 原文 ： Overview and Critique of Existing Transfer Pricing Methods In this Chapter, we provide an overview of the current transfer pricing regulations pertaining to intra-group transfers of tangible and intangible property, the performance of services, cost-sharing and global dealing
2、. Our discussion consists of (a) a description of individual methodologies and the circumstances in which they are applied； (b) a review of the economic rationale for each methodology； (c) a critique of such rationale； and (d) an assessment of practical implications. The U.S. and OECD transfer prici
3、ng regulations and guidelines sanction five transfer pricing methodologies: 1. The comparable profits method or “CPM” (referred to in the OECD Guidelines as the transactional net margin method or “TNMM”)； 2. The resale price method or “RPM”； 3. The cost plus method； 4. The comparable uncontrolled pr
4、ice (or “CUP”) method； 5. The profit split method. Taxpayers are also permitted to establish fees for inter company services rendered to affiliates based on costs alone (without a profit element) under certain circumstances. Affiliated lenders may charge a published safe harbor floating loan rate (t
5、he “Applicable Federal Rate”), or, alternatively, they may determine the prevailing market loan rate given the credit rating of the borrower and the loan terms. The U.S. transfer pricing regime also encompasses intra-firm “cost-sharing” and “global dealing” as special cases, addressed in separate pr
6、ovisions. Cost-sharing regulations govern circumstances in which related companies jointly contribute to research and development activities, and are assigned specific, non-overlapping ownership rights in the research results. The term “global dealing operation” refers to multinational financial int
7、ermediaries that buy and sell financial products, manage risk and execute transactions on behalf of customers. The proposed global dealing regulations do not formally encompass the global trading of physical commodities (as distinct from financial products), although “the IRS solicits comments on wh
8、ether these regulations should be extended to cover dealers in commodities . . .” 3.2 Resale Price and Cost Plus methods Consider next the resale price and cost plus methods. Both are transactions-based methods that the OECD favors over the CPM/TNMM. 3.2.1 Circumstances when Resale Price and Cost Pl
9、us methods Apply The resale price and cost plus methods (and, under the U.S. Temporary Regulations, the gross services margin method and the cost of services plus method) can be applied under the following fact patterns: 1. A single manufacturer sells similar products to both affiliated and unaffili
10、ated distributors； 2. A single distributor sources similar products from both affiliated and unaffiliated suppliers； 3. A single services provider renders similar liaison or agency services (in the case of the gross services margin method) to both affiliated and unaffiliated companies, and, if relev
11、ant, utilizes the same intangible assets in doing so； 4. A single services provider renders similar services (other than liaison services in the case of the cost of services plus method) under the same contractual terms to both affiliated and unaffiliated companies and utilizes the same intangible a
12、ssets, if any, in doing so； 5. Two or more manufacturers sell similar products, in one instance to affiliated distributors, and in the other instances, to unaffiliated distributors； 6. Two or more distributors source similar products, in one instance from affiliated suppliers and in the other instan
13、ces, from unaffiliated suppliers； and 7. A group member performs routine manufacturing or distribution functions and licenses intellectual property from another group member. Given one of the above fact patterns, ones choice between the resale price and cost plus methods depends principally on wheth
14、er (a) one of the group members engages in internal arms length transactions, and (b) the affiliated manufacturer or the affiliated distributor is the least complex entity (and therefore, the designated tested party). For example, under the first fact pattern, one would ordinarily apply the cost plu
15、s method, and under the second, the resale price method. As indicated above, the gross services margin method generally applies when the services at issue are intermediary in nature and the cost of services plus method applies when the tested party renders the same services to both affiliated and in
16、dependent companies. Under the fifth and sixth fact patterns, ones choice between the resale price and cost plus methods would be dictated by each group members ownership of intellectual property and the relative values thereof. Under the last fact pattern, the choice of methods depends on whether t
17、he licensee is a manufacturer or a distributor. The U.S. regulations impose higher standards of comparability under the resale price and cost plus methods, as compared to the CPM: Products must be “of the same general type (e.g., consumer electronics),”11 and the parties being compared should perfor
18、m similar functions, bear similar risks and operate under similar contractual terms. As previously noted, the OECD Guidelines do not differentiate between transfer pricing methods in establishing comparability criteria to the same degree as the U.S. regulations. Such criteria include the character o
19、f the property or service, the functions performed by the parties, contractual terms, economic circumstances and business strategies. 3.2.2 Description of Resale Price and Cost plus Methods Briefly stated, under the resale price method, one compares the captive distributors gross margin on product s
20、ourced from affiliated companies with its gross margin on product sourced from unaffiliated companies. If the captive distributor does not source similar products from both affiliated and unaffiliated companies, one can compare its resale margin on products sourced from affiliated suppliers with the resale margins reported by unaffiliated distributors that source similar products from independent suppliers. An analogous comparison is made under the cost plus method and the cost of services plus method, except that the profit level indicator differs.
