Peru has met the terms of reference (ToR) for the calendar year 2017 (year in review).
Peru can legally issue five types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework.
In practice, Peru issued no rulings within in the scope of the transparency framework.
As no rulings were issued, no exchange of information was required. Therefore no peer input was received in respect of exchanges of information on rulings received from Peru.
1015. This peer review covers Peru’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.
1016. Peru can legally issue the five following types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) rulings relating to a preferential regime;1 (ii) cross-border unilateral advance pricing arrangements (APAs) and any other cross-border unilateral tax rulings (such as an advance tax ruling) covering transfer pricing or the application of transfer pricing principles; (iii) cross-border rulings providing for a downward adjustment of taxable profits; (iv) permanent establishment (PE) rulings; and (v) related party conduit rulings. Rulings other than APAs are known in Peru as “particular consultations.” In Peru, the Central Office of Large National Taxpayers (Intendencia de Principales Contribuyentes Nacionales - IPCN), which is an operational area of SUNAT, is in charge of issuing both the particular consultations and the APAs.
1017. For Peru, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after 1 January 2015 but before 1 September 2017; or (ii) on or after 1 January 2012 but before 1 January 2015, provided still in effect as at 1 January 2015.
1018. The process for identifying past rulings was conducted as follows. The SUNAT Central Legal Area (Intendencia Nacional Jurídica Tributaria- INJT) was in charge of identifying all possible documents that could qualify as rulings under the transparency framework. As a result of the evaluation carried out, INJT concluded that particular consultations and the APAs could be in scope of the transparency framework because they are binding on the tax administration and apply to specific taxpayer circumstances.
1019. The IPCN office works independently but under the control of the Strategy and Risk Unit (Intendencia Nacional de Estrategias y Riesgos – INER). IPCN is compelled to report to INER on the issuance of particular consultations and APAs on a rolling basis. An internal database is maintained by the IPCN office for particular consultations, but not yet for APA rulings since the IPCN office has not issued any APAs. If and when APA rulings will be issued, a dedicated database will be maintained by the IPCN office. INER reviewed the report sent by the IPCN office, which is based on the internal database, and read each particular consultation issued by that unit in order to determine if it was in the scope of the transparency framework, and if it was within the period of validity defined as past rulings. INER confirmed that no relevant rulings had been issued.
1020. As there were no relevant rulings issued, it was not relevant to identify any potential exchange jurisdictions.
1021. For Peru, future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 September 2017.
1022. Based on the same procedure adopted for past rulings, the INER established that no future rulings in the scope of the transparency framework had been issued. INER reviewed the reports sent, on a rolling basis, by the IPCN office, which is based on the internal database (available for particular consultations but not for APA rulings since the IPCN office has not issued any APA yet) and read each particular consultation issued by that unit in order to determine if it was in the scope of the transparency framework, and if it was within the period of validity defined as future rulings. A dedicated team within INER will be appointed to analyse the issuance of rulings on a monthly basis and to keep information updated and report statistics to all interested stakeholders.
1023. As no future rulings were issued, it was not relevant for Peru to identify the potential exchange jurisdictions for the year in review. If a relevant ruling was issued in the future, Peru notes its intention to put in place a procedure by the end of 2019 for identifying the relevant exchange jurisdictions. Peru notes that if a ruling was issued before the establishment of the new procedure, then INER would review information contained in the ruling itself, and if necessary additional information could be obtained by consulting the taxpayer´s internal file or asking the taxpayer directly.
1024. Officers at the INER have been trained on the requirements of the transparency framework. A “Strategic Office Manager” is currently in charge of supervising the process. Peru notes that by the end of 2019, it will put in place a more formal procedure on this subject.
1025. Peru has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process and no recommendations are made.
1026. Peru has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information spontaneously. Peru notes that there are no legal or practical impediments that prevent the spontaneous exchange of information on rulings as contemplated in the Action 5 minimum standard.
1027. Peru is a party to international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including (i) the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol (OECD/Council of Europe, 2011) (“the Convention”)2 and (ii) international tax agreements in force with ten jurisdictions.3
1028. Peru will put in place a formal procedure for the completion and exchange of templates by the end of 2019. Peru notes that if a ruling was issued before the establishment of the new procedure, then the process would be the following. The Strategic Office Manager at INER will be in charge of the evaluation of the particular consultations and APA rulings with respect to the identification of the jurisdictions affected by cross-border rulings and will be responsible for the preparation of the templates. The templates, including reference to the internal FHTP suggested guidance on the summary section, will then be delivered to the Peruvian Competent Authority through an internal procedure currently used for the exchange of information on request. The Peruvian Competent Authority will forward the templates to the Competent Authorities of the relevant jurisdictions without undue delay and according to the timelines in the transparency framework.
1029. As Peru did not issue any past or future rulings in scope of the transparency framework in the relevant periods, Peru was not required to exchange any information on rulings in the year in review and no data on the timeliness of exchanges can be reported.
1030. Peru has the necessary legal framework and administrative process in place for exchanging information on rulings. Peru has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process that can be met in the absence of rulings being issued and exchanged in practice and no recommendations are made.
1031. As there were no rulings required to be exchanged by Peru for the year in review, no statistics can be reported.
1032. Peru does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015) were imposed.
|
Aspect of implementation of the transparency framework that should be improved |
Recommendation for improvement |
|---|---|
|
No recommendations are made. |
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.
OECD/Council of Europe (2011), The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264115606-en.
← 1. With respect to the following preferential regimes: Special economic zone 1 (Ceticos) and/or Special economic zone 2 (Zofratacna).
← 2. The Convention was signed on 25 October 2017 and ratified by Supreme Decree N° 012-2018-RE, published on 24 May 2018.
← 3. Peru has bilateral agreements in force with Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Ecuador, Korea, Mexico, Portugal, Switzerland and United States.