Nigeria

1. Nigeria was reviewed as part of the 2017/2018 and the 2018/2019 peer reviews. This report is supplementary to those previous reports (OECD, 2019[1]) (OECD, 2018[2]).

2. The first filing obligation for a CbC report in Nigeria applies to reporting fiscal years commencing on or after 1 January 2018.

Summary of key findings

3. Nigeria’s implementation of the Action 13 minimum standard meets all applicable terms of reference (OECD, 2017[3]), except for the following:

• It is recommended that Nigeria take steps to amend its legislation or otherwise ensure that local filing requirements only apply in accordance with the terms of reference. This recommendation remains unchanged since the 2018/2019 peer review.

4. It is recommended that Nigeria have in place the necessary processes or written procedures to ensure that the exchange of information is conducted in a manner consistent with the terms of reference relating to the exchange of information framework. This recommendation remains unchanged since the 2018/2019 peer review.

Part A: The domestic legal and administrative framework

5. Nigeria has legislation in place for implementing the BEPS Action 13 minimum standard.

(a) Parent entity filing obligation

6. No changes were identified.1

(b) Scope and timing of parent entity filing

7. No changes were identified.

(c) Limitation on local filing obligation

8. No changes were identified.

(d) Limitation on local filing in case of surrogate filing

9. No changes were identified.

(e) Effective implementation

10. No changes were identified.

Conclusion

11. It is recommended that Nigeria take steps to amend its legislation or otherwise ensure that local filing requirements only apply in accordance with the terms of reference.

Part B: The exchange of information framework

(a) Exchange of information framework

12. As at 31 March 2020, Nigeria has 51 bilateral relationships activated under the CbC MCAA. Within the context of its international exchange of information agreements that allow automatic exchange of information, Nigeria has taken steps to have qualifying competent authority agreements in effect with jurisdictions of the Inclusive Framework that meet the confidentiality, consistency and appropriate use conditions.2 Regarding Nigeria’s exchange of information framework, no inconsistencies with the terms of reference were identified.

(b) Content of information exchanged

13. No changes were identified.

(c) Completeness of exchanges

14. No changes were identified.

(d) Timeliness of exchanges

15. No changes were identified.

(e) Temporary suspension of exchange or termination of QCAA

16. No changes were identified.

(f) Consultation with other Competent Authority before determining systemic failure or significant non-compliance

17. No changes were identified.

(g) Format for information exchange

18. No changes were identified.

(h) Method for transmission

19. No changes were identified.

Conclusion

20. It is recommended that Nigeria take steps to implement processes or written procedures to ensure that the exchange of information is conducted in a manner consistent with the terms of reference relating to the exchange of information framework ahead of its first exchanges of information. This recommendation remains unchanged since the 2018/2019 peer review.

Part C: Appropriate use

Appropriate use

21. No changes were identified.

Conclusion

22. Nigeria is a non-reciprocal jurisdiction and, as such, will not receive CbC reports submitted to tax authorities in other jurisdictions, and will not apply local filing. The recommendation is removed and it is not necessary for this peer review evaluation to reach any conclusion with respect to Nigeria’s compliance with the terms of reference on appropriate use.

Summary of recommendations on the implementation of Country-by-Country Reporting

Aspect of the implementation that should be improved		Recommendation for improvement
Part A	Domestic legal and administrative framework	It is recommended that Nigeria take steps to amend its legislation or otherwise ensure that local filing requirements only apply in accordance with the terms of reference.
Part B	Exchange of information framework	It is recommended that Nigeria have in place the necessary processes or written procedures to ensure that the exchange of information is conducted in a manner consistent with the terms of reference relating to the exchange of information framework.
Part C	Appropriate use	-

References

OECD (2019), Country-by-Country Reporting – Compilation of Peer Review Reports (Phase 2): Inclusive Framework on BEPS: Action 13, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/f9bf1157-en. [1]

OECD (2018), Country-by-Country Reporting – Compilation of Peer Review Reports (Phase 1): Inclusive Framework on BEPS: Action 13, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264300057-en. [2]

OECD (2017), Terms of reference for the conduct of peer review of the Action 13 minimum standard on country-by-country reporting, OECD Publishing, https://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-action-13-on-country-by-country-reporting-peer-review-documents.pdf. [3]

Notes

← 1. Nigeria’s 2017/2018 peer review included a monitoring point relating to the definition of “Excluded MNE group”. This monitoring point remains in place.

← 2. No inconsistency with the terms of reference will be identified where a QCAA is not in effect with one or more jurisdictions of the Inclusive Framework that meet the confidentiality, consistency and appropriate use conditions, but this is due to circumstances that are not under the control of the reviewed jurisdiction. This may include, for example, where the other jurisdiction intends to exchange CbC reports using the MCAA but it does not have the Convention in effect for the relevant fiscal period, or where the other jurisdiction has declined to have a QCAA in effect with the reviewed jurisdiction.