Australia
Australia has met all aspects of the terms of reference (OECD, 2021[3]) (ToR) for the calendar year 2020 (year in review), and no recommendations are made.
Australia can legally issue four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework.
In practice, Australia issued rulings within the scope of the transparency framework as follows:
Peer input was received from six jurisdictions in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Australia. The input was generally positive, noting that overall information was complete, in a correct format and received in a timely manner.
A. The information gathering process (ToR I.A)
95. Australia can legally issue the following four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) preferential regimes;1 (ii) 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; (iii) permanent establishment rulings; and (iv) related party conduit rulings.
96. For Australia, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after 1 January 2014 but before 1 April 2016; or (ii) on or after 1 January 2010 but before 1 January 2014, provided they were still in effect as at 1 January 2014. Future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 April 2016.
97. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Australia’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 Australia’s review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Australia’s implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.
98. Australia has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process and no recommendations are made.
B. The exchange of information (ToR II.B)
99. Australia has international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including being a party to (i) the 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 45 jurisdictions.2
100. For the year in review, the timeliness of exchanges is as follows:
101. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Australia’s process for the completion and exchange of templates were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. With respect to past rulings, no further action was required. Australia’s implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.
102. Australia has the necessary legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information, a process for completing the templates in a timely way and has completed all exchanges. Australia has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process and no recommendations are made.
D. Matters related to intellectual property regimes (ToR I.A.1.3)
104. Australia does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015[1]) were imposed.
References
[3] OECD (2021), 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.
[2] OECD (ed.) (2017b), Harmful Tax Practices - 2017 Progress Report on Preferential Regimes, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264283954-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.
Notes
← 1. With respect to the following preferential regimes: 1) Offshore banking unit regime and 2) Conduit foreign income regime.
← 2. Participating jurisdictions to the Convention are available here: www.oecd.org/tax/exchange-of-tax-information/convention-on-mutual-administrative-assistance-in-tax-matters.htm. Australia also has bilateral agreements with Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Czech Republic, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kiribati, Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States and Viet Nam.