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

Jamaica

Jamaica did not provide a completed peer review questionnaire to the Secretariat. It is not known whether Jamaica has implemented the transparency framework. Jamaica is recommended to ensure that it has put in place an effective information gathering process to identify all relevant past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions and to implement a review and supervision mechanism, as soon as possible (ToR I.4). Jamaica is recommended to put in place a domestic legal framework allowing spontaneous exchange of information on rulings if needed and to ensure the timely exchange of information on rulings in the form required by the transparency framework (ToR II.5).

It is not known whether Jamaica can legally issue any types of ruling within the scope of the transparency framework, or whether in practice Jamaica issued any such rulings.

As no exchanges of information on rulings were conducted, no peer input was received in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Jamaica.

Introduction

663.  This peer review covers Jamaica’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 Terms of Reference (ToR). Each part is discussed in turn. A summary of recommendations is included at the end of this report.

A. The information gathering process

664.  Jamaica was not yet able to complete the peer review questionnaire. It is not known whether Jamaica has implemented the transparency framework.

Conclusion on section A

665.  Jamaica is recommended to ensure that it has put in place an effective information gathering process to identify all relevant past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions and to implement a review and supervision mechanism, as soon as possible (ToR I.4).

B. The exchange of information

Legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information (ToR II.5.1, II.5.2)

666.  It is not known whether Jamaica has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information on rulings spontaneously. Jamaica is recommended to put in place a domestic legal framework allowing spontaneous exchange of information on rulings if needed (ToR II.5.1).

667.  Jamaica 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”), and (ii) double tax agreements and tax information exchange agreements in force with 27 jurisdictions.1

Completion and exchange of templates (ToR II.5.3, II.5.4, II.5.5, II.5.6, II.5.7)

668.  It is not known whether Jamaica has put in place a process to exchange information on rulings in accordance with the form and timelines required by the transparency framework. Jamaica is recommended to ensure the timely exchange of information on rulings in the form required by the transparency framework.

Conclusion on section B

669.  Jamaica is recommended to put in place a domestic legal framework allowing spontaneous exchange of information on rulings if needed and to ensure the timely exchange of information on rulings in the form required by the transparency framework (ToR II.5).

C. Statistics (ToR IV)

670.  As no information on rulings was exchanged for the year in review, no statistical data can be reported.

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

671.  Jamaica does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015) were imposed.

Summary of recommendations on implementation of the transparency framework

 

Aspect of implementation of the transparency framework that should be improved	Recommendation for improvement
It is not known whether Jamaica has an information gathering process in place.	Jamaica is recommended to ensure that it has put in place an effective information gathering process to identify all relevant past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions and to implement a review and supervision mechanism, as soon as possible.
It is not known whether Jamaica has a domestic legal framework allowing spontaneous exchange of information on rulings and has in place a process for completion of templates and exchange of information on rulings.	Jamaica is recommended to put in place a domestic legal framework allowing spontaneous exchange of information on rulings if needed and to ensure the timely exchange of information on rulings in the form required by the transparency framework

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.

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.

Note

← 1.  Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Canada, China (People’s Republic of), Denmark, Dominica, Faroe Islands, Finland, France, Germany, Greenland, Grenada, Guyana, Iceland, Israel, Norway, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom and United States.