1. ACTION 14 MAKING DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESSES MORE EFFECTIVE 1

2. “Develop solutions to address obstacles that prevent countries from [re]solving treaty-related disputes under MAP, including the absence of arbitration provisions in most treaties and the fact that access to MAP and arbitration may be denied in certain cases.” Action 14 of the BEPS Action Plan 2

3. Minimum standard comprising specific measures to improve the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of the MAP process, with review of its implementation through a peer- based monitoring mechanism. Complementary best practices related to the objectives of the minimum standard. Supplementary commitment to mandatory binding MAP arbitration by 20 countries (representing >90% of MAP case inventories as reported to the OECD). 3 September 2015 Action 14 Report

4. STATUS QUO 4

5. 5 Number of MAP cases initiated has steadily increased since 2006

6. 6 Competent authorities are working hard

7. 7 OECD country MAP case inventories have significantly increased since 2006

8. 8 How long to complete a MAP case?

9. 9

10. THE WAY FORWARD 10

11. “Develop solutions to address obstacles that prevent countries from [re]solving treaty-related disputes under MAP, including the absence of arbitration provisions in most treaties and the fact that access to MAP and arbitration may be denied in certain cases.” Action 14 of the BEPS Action Plan 2

12. Ensuring that treaty obligations related to the MAP are fully implemented in good faith and that MAP cases are resolved in a timely manner. Ensuring the implementation of administrative processes that promote the prevention and timely resolution of treaty-related disputes. Ensuring that taxpayers that meet the requirements of Article 25(1) can access the MAP. Minimum standard comprising 17 specific measures to improve the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of the MAP process, with three general objectives – 12 Action 14: September 2015 Report

13. It should result in a guarantee to taxpayers that taxation in accordance to the tax treaty will take place In relation to (bilateral) tax treaties MAP = government-to-government dispute resolution process 13 Important notions

14. Transparency between governments about handling and content eligible cases Transparency to taxpayers about options to pursue and handling of cases Convergence of understanding and agreement on goals between governments External publication statistics and reports Building a community and peer review Independent party involvement 14 Mechanisms Change treaties through Multilateral Instrument Develop TORs and assessment methodology MS

15. Good faith implementation of treaty obligations related to the MAP: 1.1Include Art. 25(1)-(3) in tax treaties, provide MAP access in TP cases and implement the resulting mutual agreements. 1.2Provide MAP access in cases in which there is a disagreement regarding an anti-abuse provision. 1.3Seek to resolve MAP cases within an average timeframe of 24 months. 1.4Enhance competent authority relationships by becoming members of the FTA MAP Forum. 1.5Provide timely and complete reporting of MAP statistics. 1.6Commit to review of compliance with the minimum standard through a peer review in the context of the FTA MAP Forum. 1.7Provide transparency with respect to country positions on MAP arbitration. 15 Action 14 minimum standard

16. Administrative processes that promote the prevention and timely resolution of treaty-related disputes: 2.1Publish guidelines to access and use the MAP and take appropriate measures to make such information available to taxpayers. 2.2Publish country MAP profiles on a shared public platform. 2.3Ensure that staff in charge of MAP processes have the authority to resolve MAP cases in accordance with the terms of the applicable tax treaty. 2.4Use appropriate performance indicators for the competent authority function and staff. 2.5Ensure that adequate resources are provided to the MAP function. 2.6Clarify that audit settlements do not preclude access to MAP. 2.7Provide for the roll-back of APAs in appropriate cases. 16 Action 14 minimum standard

17. Ensuring that taxpayers that meet the requirements of Article 25(1) can access the MAP: 3.1Both competent authorities should be made aware of MAP requests being submitted and should be able to give their views on whether a request is accepted or rejected. 3.2Countries’ published MAP guidance should identify the specific information and documentation required to be submitted with a request for MAP assistance. 3.3Countries should include in their tax treaties the second sentence of Art. 25(2) (“Any agreement reached shall be implemented notwithstanding any time limits in the domestic law of the Contracting States.”) or accept alternative treaty provisions that limit the time during which a Contracting State may make adjustments under Art. 9(1) or 7(2). 17 Action 14 minimum standard

18. Implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard to be reviewed through robust peer- based monitoring mechanism. Monitoring process to be conducted by the FTA MAP Forum, reporting to the G20 through the Committee on Fiscal Affairs. Terms of reference and assessment methodology to be developed by Q1 2016. 18 Peer review

19. Work mandated by Action 14 also identified 11 best practices related to the three general objectives of the minimum standard. Complementary measures more appropriately presented as best practices: not susceptible to review/evaluation or not all OECD and G20 countries willing to commit to them. Not part of the minimum standard or peer review process. 19 Best practices

20. No OECD/G20 consensus on moving to mandatory binding MAP arbitration. 20 countries representing more than 90% of MAP cases reported to the OECD at the end of 2013 have committed to introduce MAP arbitration through the BEPS process. Mandatory binding MAP arbitration provision to be developed as part of negotiation of the Action 15 multilateral instrument. 20 Supplementary commitment to mandatory binding MAP arbitration