Harmful Tax Practices – 2017 Peer Review Reports on the Exchange of Information on Tax Rulings

Jordan

Jordan has met all aspects of the terms of reference (ToR) for the calendar year 2017 (year in review) that can be met in the absence of rulings being issued.

Jordan indicates that it cannot legally issue any type of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework. Jordan issues “circulars” and “opinion statements” which give a general clarification with respect the interpretation and application of the tax legislation per specific taxpayer. Since these documents are very general and not legally binding on the tax administration, these tax opinions are not rulings as defined in the Action 5 report (OECD, 2015).

As no rulings were issued, no exchange of information was required under the transparency framework. No peer input was received in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Jordan.

Introduction

706.  This peer review covers Jordan’s implementation of the BEPS Action 5 transparency framework for the year 2017. The report has four parts, each relating to a key part of the ToR. Each part is discussed in turn. A summary of recommendations is included at the end of this report.

A. The information gathering process

707.  As no rulings are issued, this section is not assessed.

B. The exchange of information

708.  As no rulings are issued, this section is not assessed.

C. Statistics (ToR IV)

709.  As no rulings are issued, no statistical data can be reported.

D. Matters related to intellectual property regimes (ToR I.4.1.3)

710.  Jordan offers one preferential regime, which also offers benefits to income from intellectual property (“IP regime”).1 However no transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015) were relevant, as follows:

• New entrants benefitting from the grandfathered IP regime: not applicable for the year in review, because Jordan is currently in the process of amending/abolishing the Development zones regime and has not taken a decision yet on whether it will provide grandfathering to existing taxpayers. Should Jordan provide grandfathering to taxpayers for which IP income benefits and that entered the regimes after the publication of the 2017 Progress Report (OECD, 2017), which occurred on 16 October 2017, transparency requirements will apply and this will be taken into account during the subsequent peer review.

• Third category of IP assets: not applicable to this regime, which in 2017 was in the process of being amended.

• Taxpayers making use of the option to treat the nexus ratio as a rebuttable presumption: not applicable to this regime, which in 2017 was in the process of being amended.

Summary of recommendations on implementation of the transparency framework

 

Aspect of implementation of the transparency framework that should be improved	Recommendation for improvement
	No recommendations are made.

References

OECD (2017), BEPS Action 5 on Harmful Tax Practices – Terms of Reference and Methodology for the Conduct of the Peer Reviews of the Action 5 Transparency Framework, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD, Paris. www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-action-5-harmful-tax-practices-peer-review-transparencyframework.pdf.

OECD (2015), Countering Harmful Tax Practices More Effectively, Taking into Account Transparency and Substance, Action 5 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264241190-en.

Note

← 1.  This regime is the Development zones.