지급보증 용역에 대한 이전가격 과세제도 및 실무적 적용에 관한 연구

Abstract

As companies increase their overseas investment and entry into foreign markets, the number of financial guarantee service transactions with an advantage of local financing has also continued to increase. The National Tax Service initiatively began the transfer pricing taxation on financial guarantee service transactions in 2012 prior to the enactment of regulations concerning financial guarantee services in foreign countries. However, many companies filed tax appeals claiming that the taxation was unreasonable due to the lack of a precise standard, which further led to a number of tax litigation. The National Tax Service closed lawsuits with most of the companies through arbitrary adjustments due to successive losses, and various changes occurred with the relevant regulations and practical applications after losing in the Supreme Court. In this study, the taxation system for financial guarantee service transactions in Korea and the transfer pricing guidelines related to financial guarantee service provided by international organizations were analyzed. In addition, the practical applications of the transfer pricing method stipulated in the Law for Coordination of International Tax Affairs were reviewed. Lastly, the study analyzed meaningful precedents that resulted in policy change in the taxation of financial guarantee services by the National Tax Service, pointed out existing problems of such regulations, and proposed recommendations with the measures for improvement. First, regarding the current financial guarantee service fees that are applied collectively to all lenders, it would be necessary to clearly distinguish entities subject to the receipt of financial guarantee service fees, taking into account each entity’s substantial economic nature and the overall transfer pricing structure. Second, legal certainty and predictability should be enhanced by clarifying regulations on the claim of financial guarantee service fees for newly established entities based on the Supreme Court’s final decision, which did not recognize the rationality of the use of the Moody's model for the newly established entities. Third, based on the recent announcement of transfer pricing guidelines on financial transactions by the international organizations, it is expected to accelerate legislation in foreign countries on such regulations. Thus, transfer pricing disputes related to future financial transactions are likely to increase, and domestic companies would have to minimize future tax risks through advance preparation for such challenges.