Our experience suggests that taxpayers carrying out the obligation to submit transfer pricing (TP) documentation to the State Revenue Service (SRS) may suddenly find themselves in an awkward situation, as the functionality of the Electronic Declaration System (EDS) prevents them from uploading a screenshot file that supports their benchmarking study because of its size. So the document fails to reach the SRS and puts the taxpayer at risk of defaulting on statutory requirements for information to be included in TP documentation. This article offers a solution to this problem.
Section 15.2 of the Taxes and Duties Act requires taxpayers to prepare TP documentation and duly submit it to the tax authority.
The Cabinet of Ministers’ Rule No. 802 of 18 December 2018, Transfer Pricing Documentation and Advance Pricing Agreement Procedures, specifies the content of information to be included in the master file and the local file.
Submitting screenshots that show the date they were made and support the financial indicators of selected independent companies used in TP analysis is a key requirement. We are talking about TP documentation that includes not only, for instance, a benchmarking strategy screenshot (often the case so far) but also screenshots supporting the finding about each selected company that has been tested.
The SRS’s public guidance “Transfer Pricing Documentation” states that TP documentation must be submitted in electronic form via EDS.
The size of a screenshot file containing data on independent companies that serve as a basis for TP analysis usually exceeds the prescribed size for an EDS attachment. This is because the permitted size of one document is 50 megabytes and the number of electronic documents for the master file and the local file on EDS has so far been limited to six documents.
Given the tight statutory requirements, taxpayers are unsure about a convenient, secure and successful way to submit information (screenshots) supporting their TP analysis to the SRS via EDS.
We asked the SRS to help solve this problem. Since today’s hybrid working arrangements provide taxpayers with the technical capabilities and power to ensure remote access to information supporting their TP analysis, we asked the SRS to indicate how taxpayers should go about submitting that information remotely.
In reply to our question about ways of submitting TP documentation with attached screenshots, the SRS explained that the “Transfer Pricing Documentation” form within the EDS “Corporate Income Tax Documents” currently makes it possible to attach up to 25 files, each up to 50 megabytes.
When it comes to submitting multiple screenshots at the same time, the SRS finds it useful to combine and upload several screenshots in a single .pdf or .docx file.
If the previous steps were not successful and the number of documents is still over the limit (25 files), the SRS suggests submitting the TP documentation for the same period in more than a single go. In that case, however, the taxpayer has to notify the SRS.
While the size of one document for uploading to EDS remained unchanged, the SRS was able to find a solution and considerably increased the number of files. This significantly mitigates the risk of screenshots failing to reach the SRS. Meanwhile, the taxpayer should structure the information by splitting large files up into smaller ones or combining screenshots of different sizes so that the final file stays within the size limits.
As the deadline for submitting TP documentation approaches, you should keep up a constructive dialogue with the SRS and warn their officers if your company has a technical need to upload TP documentation for the same tax period in multiple goes.
If you have any comments on this article please email them to lv_mindlink@pwc.com
Ask questionWe have written before about significant differences in measuring total transactions made with related parties during the financial year, to be reported on line 6.5.1 of the corporate income tax (CIT) return, and controlled transactions that determine whether the taxpayer becomes liable to prepare and file transfer pricing (TP) documentation with the State Revenue Service (SRS).
For many years, challenging the receipt of intragroup services and commercial benefits has been among the most popular grounds for corporate income tax (CIT) assessments made by the State Revenue Service (SRS). Our analysis of one of the latest publicly available transfer pricing court cases leads to the conclusion that such a taxpayer dispute with the SRS has not lost its relevance. This article looks at an example from the Latvian court case – the taxpayer’s dispute with the SRS over missing evidence that the taxpayer has actually received management services from a related foreign company.
A taxpayer assessing his transfer pricing (TP) compliance might find that a transaction with a related party is not arm’s length according to a preliminary comparability analysis. When analysing each case separately, however, we sometimes find that the taxpayer has failed to take all necessary preventive measures to mitigate TP risk. One of those measures involves assessing the need to make comparability adjustments.
We use cookies to make our site work well for you and so we can continually improve it. The cookies that keep the site functioning are always on. We use analytics and marketing cookies to help us understand what content is of most interest and to personalise your user experience.
It’s your choice to accept these or not. You can either click the 'I accept all’ button below or use the switches to choose and save your choices.
For detailed information on how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please visit our cookies information page.
These cookies are necessary for the website to operate. Our website cannot function without these cookies and they can only be disabled by changing your browser preferences.
These cookies allow us to measure and report on website activity by tracking page visits, visitor locations and how visitors move around the site. The information collected does not directly identify visitors. We drop these cookies and use Adobe to help us analyse the data.
These cookies help us provide you with personalised and relevant services or advertising, and track the effectiveness of our digital marketing activities.