잔여이익분할방법상 결합이익의 기본개념과 적용조건

Abstract

This paper is to review whether the tax office’s application of residual profit split method is legitimately right or not in a case no. 2017Jun281 of the tax tribunal’s recent decision. This case has an important meaning in a sense that it firstly addresses application of the residual profit split method in the area of transfer pricing. It also provides opportunity to take a look at the OECD’s BEPS report on actions 10 titled “Revised Guidance on the Application of the Transactional Profit Split Method.” The factual perspective which makes this case distinctive is that the tax office recognized multiple parties were involved for the calculation of combined profits. The reason why this viewpoint is interestingly attractive is that in a normal case, there are only two parties involved. The question to follow is this: What are specific conditions in order to allocate combined profits to multiple parties? The tax office and the tax tribunal did not explicitly say about this issue. This paper asserts that it depends on the factual analysis of whether multiple parties made collective contributions to combined profits. In light of this logic, this paper concludes that multiple parties could not make such contributions in this case because they are not doing in the business structure like stream of value chains. Nextly, the tax office did not allocate relative value of the contributions to multiple parties even though their profits are included in calculating combined profits. This paper points out that the tax office’s approach in that matter is absolutely wrong because it is not in line with the conditions for recognition of combined profits.