Harmful Tax Practices – 2019 Peer Review Reports on the Exchange of Information on Tax Rulings

Ukraine

Ukraine has met all aspects of the terms of reference (OECD, 2017[3]) (ToR) for the calendar year 2019 (year in review) that can be met given in the absence of rulings being issued.

Ukraine can legally issue one type of ruling within the scope of the transparency framework. In practice, Ukraine has issued no rulings within the scope of the transparency framework. Ukraine notes that as of the end of 2019, it has received four requests for unilateral APAs (two requests received in 2018 and two in 2019) which are under review.

As no exchanges were required to take place, no peer input was received in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Ukraine.

A. The information gathering process

1110. Ukraine can legally issue the following type of ruling within the scope of the transparency framework: cross-border unilateral 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.

1111. For Ukraine, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after 1 January 2016, but before 1 April 2018; and (ii) on or after 1 January 2014, but before 1 January 2016, provided still in effect as at 1 January 2016. Future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 April 2018.

1112. In the prior years’ peer review report, it was determined that Ukraine’s undertakings to identify past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. In addition, it was determined that Ukraine’s review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Ukraine’s implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard. In the previous year peer review report, Ukraine noted that it was working to have in place a more formal procedure with respect to its review and supervision mechanism. During the year in review, Ukraine clarified that the existing APA procedure, formalised in the tax code, is able to ensure that all relevant information related to APAs rulings is captured adequately.

1113. Ukraine has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process and no recommendations are made.

B. The exchange of information

1114. In the prior year’ peer review report, it was determined that Ukraine’s process for the completion and exchange of templates were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. With respect to past rulings, no action was required. Ukraine’s implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

1115. Ukraine has international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including being a party to the (i) Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol (OECD/Council of Europe, 2011[4]) (“the Convention”) and (ii) bilateral agreements in force with 75 jurisdictions.1

1116. As no rulings have been issued, no exchanges were required for the year in review and no data on timeliness can be reported.

1117. Ukraine has the necessary legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information and a process for completion of templates and exchange of information on rulings. Ukraine has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process and no recommendations are made.

C. Statistics (ToR IV)

1118. As no rulings have been issued, no statistics can be reported.

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

1119. Ukraine does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015[1]) 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
	No recommendations are made.

References

[3] 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 Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-action-5-harmful-tax-practices-peer-review-transparency-framework.pdf.

[1] 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://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264241190-en.

[4] OECD/Council of Europe (2011), The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264115606-en.