Mauritius

Mauritius has met all aspects of the terms of reference (OECD, 2021[3]) (ToR) for the calendar year 2021 (year in review), and no recommendations are made.

Mauritius can legally issue three types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework.

In practice, Mauritius issued rulings within the scope of the transparency framework as follows:

Type of ruling	Number of rulings
Past rulings	20
Future rulings in the period 1 September 2017 – 31 December 2017	0
Future rulings in the calendar year 2018	1
Future rulings in the calendar year 2019	1
Future rulings in the calendar year 2020	10
Future rulings in the year in review	6

No peer input was received in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Mauritius.

Information gathering process (ToR I.A)

837. Mauritius can legally issue the following three 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; and (iii) permanent establishment rulings.

838. For Mauritius, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after 1 January 2015 but before 1 September 2017; and (ii) on or after 1 January 2012 but before 1 January 2015, provided they were still in effect as at 1 January 2015. Future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 September 2017.

839. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Mauritius’ 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 Mauritius’ review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Mauritius’ implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

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

Exchange of information (ToR II.B)

841. Mauritius has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information spontaneously. Mauritius 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.

842. Mauritius has 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[1]) (“the Convention”) and (ii) bilateral agreements in force with 46 jurisdictions.2

843. For the year in review, the timeliness of exchanges is as follows:

Future rulings within the scope of the transparency framework	Number of exchanges transmitted within three months of the information becoming available to the competent authority or immediately after legal impediments have been lifted	Delayed exchanges
		Number of exchanges transmitted later than three months of the information on rulings becoming available to the competent authority	Reasons for the delays	Any other comments
	6	0	N/A	N/A

Follow-up requests received for exchange of the ruling	Number	Average time to provide response	Number of requests not answered
	0	N/A	N/A

844. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Mauritius’ 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. Mauritius’ implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

845. Mauritius 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. Mauritius has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process and no recommendations are made.

Statistics (ToR IV.D)

846. The statistics for the year in review are as follows:

Category of ruling	Number of exchanges	Jurisdictions exchanged with
Ruling related to a preferential regime	5	Guernsey, India, Singapore, United Kingdom, United States
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	0	N/A
Permanent establishment rulings	1	De minimis rule applies
IP regimes: total exchanges on taxpayers benefitting from the third category of IP assets, new entrants benefitting from grandfathered IP regimes; and taxpayers making use of the option to treat the nexus ratio as a rebuttable presumption	0	N/A
Total	6

Matters related to intellectual property regimes (ToR I.A.1.3)

847. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Mauritius’s information gathering and exchange of information processes for matters related to intellectual property regimes3 were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Mauritius’s implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

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 (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.

[2] 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.

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

Notes

← 1. 1) Global business license 1, 2) Global business license 2, 3) Global headquarters administration regime, 4) Global treasury activities, 5) Captive insurances, 6) Freeport zone, 8) Shipping regime, 9) Innovation box, 10) Partial exemption system, 11) Trusts and 12) Foundations.

← 2. Parties to the Convention are available here: www.oecd.org/tax/exchange-of-tax-information/convention-on-mutual-administrative-assistance-in-tax-matters.htm. Mauritius also has bilateral agreements in force with Australia, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Botswana, Cabo Verde, China (People’s Republic of), Congo, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, Estonia, Eswatini, France, Germany, Ghana, Guernsey, India, Italy, Jersey, Kuwait, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Monaco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Rwanda, Seychelles, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Thailand, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Zambia, Zimbabwe. In addition, Mauritius’ TIEA with the United States permits for the spontaneous exchange of information.

← 3. 1) Global business licence 1 and 2) Global business licence 2 and 3) Innovation box.