This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Code of Conduct Group on business taxation - background documents of meetings'.


 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL  
TAXATION AND CUSTOMS UNION 
Direct taxation, Tax Coordination, Economic Analysis and Evaluation 
  Direct Tax Policy & Cooperation 
 
 
Brussels, 13 November 2013 
[deleted] 
TAXUD.D.2 (2013) Ares 3722968 
 
WORKING DOCUMENT 
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 
 
 
COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE 
COOPERATION FOR TAXATION 
 
MODEL INSTRUCTION FOR THE SPONTANEOUS EXCHANGE OF CROSS-BORDER RULINGS 
AND UNILATERAL ADVANCE TRANSFER PRICING AGREEMENTS 
 
MEETING N° 7 OF 28-29 NOVEMBER 2013 
 
 
 

 
 
Table of contents 
 
1. 
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 3 
2. 
LEGAL BASIS COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2011/16/EU .............................................. 4 
2.1.  Article 9 Scope and conditions of spontaneous exchange of 
information ........................................................................................................ 4 
2.2.  Article 10(1) Time limits ................................................................................... 4 
3. 
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 5 
3.1.  The Code of Conduct for Business Taxation and the Code of Conduct 
Group ................................................................................................................. 5 
3.2.  Definition of a cross-border ruling and examples of cross-border 
rulings to be sent spontaneously ........................................................................ 5 
3.3.  Definition of unilateral advance transfer pricing agreements to be sent 
spontaneously .................................................................................................... 6 
4. 
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND ENSURING EFFECTIVE 
EXCHANGE REGARDING CROSS-BORDER RULINGS AND 
UNILATERAL APAS ................................................................................................ 6 
5. 
CONTENT OF INFORMATION TO BE SENT SPONTANEOUSLY ..................... 8 
5.1.  Cross-border rulings .......................................................................................... 8 
5.2.  Unilateral APAs ................................................................................................. 9 
6. 
FEEDBACK ................................................................................................................ 9 
7. 
MONITORING ......................................................................................................... 10 
 


 
1. 
INTRODUCTION  
The purpose of this Model Instruction is to provide practical guidance with a view 
to improving the effectiveness of the arrangements for spontaneous exchanges of 
information. It is particularly focused on motivating tax officials to initiate 
spontaneous exchanges of information on cross-border rulings and unilateral 
advance transfer pricing agreements (APAs).  
Information provided spontaneously is potentially very effective as the information 
selected by the (local) tax officials draws on their own practical experience 
regarding what will be relevant to the levying of taxes. Spontaneous exchange of 
information relies heavily on the active participation and co-operation of tax 
officials. Therefore it is important for all Member States to develop strategies that 
aim to encourage and promote the use of spontaneous exchange of information by 
their tax officials in accordance with Council Directive 2011/16/EU. This Model 
Instruction supports the implementation of such strategies in the Member States’ 
internal guidelines, procedures and awareness programs for spontaneous exchange 
of information. It highlights the importance and suggests practical steps to facilitate 
the exchanges. This Model Instruction also emphasizes the importance of sending 
feedback on the effectiveness of the information provided.1   
Although this Model Instruction specifically targets the spontaneous exchange of 
cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs, it should be stressed that this does not 
intend to convey that the spontaneous exchange of any other information that may 
be relevant to another Member State is less important.   The general principles set 
out in this note (legal basis for spontaneous exchange, the use of the standard forms 
and the common communication network (CCN), time limits and other 
practicalities) also apply to spontaneous exchange on other issues, e.g. information 
detected during a tax audit or investigation. 
When communicating with countries outside the EU, the bilaterally agreed 
procedures must be followed by the competent authority. 
                                                 
1 To localize this Model Instruction, the Member States can, if needed, add an additional paragraph to 
describe their own national procedures (how to contact the competent authority, notification procedure 
etc.). 


2. 
LEGAL BASIS COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2011/16/EU  
2.1.  Article 9 Scope and conditions of spontaneous exchange of information 
(1) 
The competent authority of each Member State shall communicate the 
information referred to in Article 1(1)2 to the competent authority of 
any other Member State concerned, in any of the following 
circumstances:  
–  the competent authority of one Member State has grounds for 
supposing that there may be a loss of tax in the other Member 
State;  
–   a person liable to tax obtains a reduction in, or an exemption 
from, tax in one Member State which would give rise to a tax 
liability in the other Member State;  
–  business dealings between a person liable to tax in one Member 
State and a person liable to tax in the other Member State are 
conducted through one or more countries in such a way that a 
saving in tax may result in one or the other Member State or in 
both;  
–  the competent authority of a Member State has grounds for 
supposing that a saving of tax may result from artificial transfers 
of profits within groups of enterprises;  
–  information forwarded to one Member State by the competent 
authority of the other Member State has enabled information to be 
obtained which may be relevant in assessing liability to tax in the 
latter Member State. 
(2) 
The competent authorities of each Member State may communicate, 
by spontaneous exchange, to the competent authorities of the other 
Member States any information of which they are aware and which 
may be useful to the competent authorities of the other Member States. 
2.2.  Article 10(1) Time limits 
(1) 
The competent authority to which information referred to in Article 
9(1) becomes available shall forward that information to the competent 
authority of any other Member State concerned as quickly as possible, 
and no later than one month after it becomes available. 
                                                 
2   Article 1(1): "This Directive lays down the rules and procedures under which the Member States shall 
cooperate with each other with a view to exchanging information that is foreseeably relevant to the 
administration and enforcement of the domestic laws of the Member States concerning the taxes 
referred to in Article 2". 


3. 
BACKGROUND 
3.1.  The Code of Conduct for Business Taxation and the Code of Conduct 
Group 
The Code of Conduct for Business Taxation addresses harmful tax 
competition inside the EU. This is an important factor in reducing distortions 
in the single market and in preventing significant losses of tax revenue.  It is a 
non-binding instrument of a political character containing political 
commitments. It was agreed by a "Resolution of the Member States meeting 
within the Council" in December 1997.   
The Code of Conduct contains two central features: 
(1) 
The commitment from Member States to amend their laws and 
practices as necessary with a view to eliminating any harmful 
measures as soon as possible (rollback), and 
(2) 
The commitment from Member States to refrain from introducing any 
new tax measures which are harmful within the meaning of the Code 
(standstill).  
In March 1998 the Code of Conduct Group was established to assess harmful 
business tax measures that may fall within the scope of the Code of Conduct 
for Business Taxation and to monitor their abolishment. It is a special high-
level Council Working Group.  
3.2.  Definition of a cross-border ruling and examples of cross-border rulings 
to be sent spontaneously 
The Code of Conduct spells out, inter alia, five criteria for assessing whether a 
tax measure is harmful. One of these criteria is lack of transparency. This 
element has been given particular emphasis by the Code of Conduct Group in 
its considerations with respect to the advance interpretation or application of 
tax provisions by a tax administration to a specific fact pattern of a specific 
taxpayer (tax rulings). While recognising the potentially positive aspects of 
such administrative practices, the Code of Conduct Group also agreed on the 
need to improve the exchange of relevant information specifically for cross-
border rulings that may affect tax bases of other Member States. Therefore, in 
June 2010 the Code of Conduct Group established the following general 
guidance: 
If a Member State provides advance interpretation or application of a legal 
provision for a cross-border situation or transaction of an individual taxpayer 
(hereafter: cross-border ruling), which is likely to be relevant for the tax 
authorities of another Member State, the tax authorities of the first Member 
State will spontaneously exchange the relevant information regarding this 
cross-border ruling in accordance with Community law provisions with the 
latter Member State in order to assure coherent overall taxation.  


By means of a non-exhaustive list, this would specifically concern the 
following types of cross-border rulings: 
(1) 
MS 1 gives clearance on the absence of a PE in MS 1 to a company 
resident in MS 2. Such a ruling could be relevant for the tax authorities 
of MS 2 (same applies in the reverse situation); 
(2) 
MS 1 gives clearance on specific items related to the tax base of a PE 
in MS 1 to a company resident in MS 2. Such a ruling could be 
relevant for the tax authorities of MS 2 (same applies in the reverse 
situation); 
(3) 
MS 1 gives clearance on the tax status of a hybrid entity resident in 
MS 1 which is controlled by residents of MS 2. Such a ruling could be 
relevant for the tax authorities of MS 2 (same applies in the reverse 
situation); 
(4) 
MS 1 gives clearance to a company resident in MS 1 regarding the tax 
value for depreciation for an asset that is acquired from a group 
company in MS 2. Such a ruling could be relevant for the tax 
authorities of MS 2 (same applies in the reverse situation).  
3.3.  Definition of unilateral advance transfer pricing agreements to be sent 
spontaneously 
Advance transfer pricing agreements are a specific type of cross border ruling 
relating to transfer pricing. 
For the purposes of this document a unilateral advance pricing agreement is 
any agreement between a single Member State (or its political sub-divisions 
or local authorities) and a taxpayer that determines, in advance of controlled 
transactions, an appropriate set of criteria (e.g. method, comparables and 
appropriate adjustments thereto, critical assumptions as to future events) for 
the determination of the transfer pricing or the transfer price itself for those 
controlled transactions over a fixed period of time.  This includes an 
agreement between a MS and a taxpayer on how profits of a permanent 
establishment should be determined over a fixed period of time. 
4. 
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND ENSURING EFFECTIVE EXCHANGE REGARDING 
CROSS-BORDER RULINGS AND UNILATERAL APAS 

This Model Instruction covers cross-border rulings involving companies and 
unilateral APAs. Examples of the cross-border rulings to be exchanged 
spontaneously can be found in paragraph 3.2 of this Model Instruction. The cross-
border rulings and unilateral APAs as well as feedback (please see paragraph 6) 
shall be sent by using standard electronic forms.  National procedures will indicate 
who is responsible for filling in those forms in the Member States (for example the 
decision maker preparing the cross-border ruling or the competent authority). 
[deleted] 
Information exchanged shall, as far as possible, be provided by electronic means 
using the common communication network (CCN) between the competent 


authorities. Timing of the exchanges has to be in line with Article 10 of the Council 
Directive 2011/16/EU. 
Member States shall ensure that cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs that fulfil 
the criteria detailed in Article 9 (1) of the Council Directive 2011/16/EU are 
exchanged with other Member States. The process for exchanging should follow 
Article 4 of Council Directive 2011/16/EU.  It will be the responsibility of the 
receiving authority to ensure information reaches the correct person. In order to 
ensure that each Member State has sufficient national procedures in place, the 
following criteria are to be followed: 
(1) 
Each Member State ensures that their resource availability,  procedures and 
network for spontaneous exchange of information allows fulfilment of the 
requirements of the Council Directive 2011/16/EU, in particular that: 
–  The national network for spontaneous exchange of information in 
general provides the possibilities for effective exchange regarding 
cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs; 
–  There is a clear communication channel from the decision maker 
to the competent authority that sends the information to another 
Member State. 
(2) 
Each Member State ensures that good quality training is organized and 
national guidance is prepared for the decision makers who prepare cross-
border rulings and/or unilateral APAs. 
–  The decision makers must have knowledge about the requirements 
set by Article 9 (1) of Council Directive 2011/16/EU and thus be 
able to identify relevant cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs 
that are to be exchanged. They will also be informed and have 
knowledge of any additional clarifications and practical 
arrangements to spontaneous exchange of information regarding 
cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs such as this instruction; 
–  The decision makers must have sufficient knowledge on the 
national information exchange procedure to be able to transfer a 
relevant cross-border ruling and unilateral APA to another 
Member State through the designated national competent 
authorities. 
(3) 
Each Member State will take all reasonable measures to overcome any 
additional obstacles that might hinder the effective exchange of information 
on cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs, in particular that: 
–  This instruction gives a definition of cross border rulings and 
examples of cross-border rulings to be sent spontaneously in 
paragraph 3.2 and a definition of unilateral APAs in paragraph 
3.3, but those definitions should not be interpreted too narrowly. If 
there is some doubt as to whether or not the definitions are met the 
default position of the decision maker should be to exchange if the 
conditions of spontaneous exchange conditions (under Article 9(1) 
Council Directive 2011/16/EU) are otherwise met. 


5. 
CONTENT OF INFORMATION TO BE SENT SPONTANEOUSLY  
5.1.  Cross-border rulings 
When sending spontaneous information on cross-border rulings, the sending 
Member State should take into consideration some obstacles, which may 
result in limited use of such information such as language barrier and 
complexity of the cross-border ruling. Therefore information, which will 
finally be sent, should be as clear and comprehensive as possible.  
Firstly it should be remembered that the purpose of this information is to give 
the receiving Member State sufficient facts to take a decision as to whether or 
not the case is potentially significant. Therefore, it is strongly recommended 
that when sending information about cross-border rulings the sending 
Member State adheres to the set of principles and guidance contained in this 
Model Instruction.  
At this stage it is up to the sending Member State to determine which 
information, for example the full text of the cross-border ruling in the original 
language or any other material, would be considered useful.  However at a 
minimum it is important that a short summary, preferably in English or any 
other language bilaterally agreed, should be provided and should contain the 
following information(in the free text box in the SIF Part C Section C3):  
(1) 
Reference number of the cross-border ruling where available; 
(2) 
Details of the issue for which the taxpayer requires an answer; 
(3) 
Administration’s response and reasoning. In the case when an administration 
publishes rulings on its website, inserting a direct link to such ruling would 
facilitate the work of the receiving Member State;  
(4) 
Information on whether or not the ruling is binding; 
(5) 
In the case that it is a binding ruling, information should be supplied 
regarding who is bound by this ruling (administration and/or taxpayer), and 
whether this ruling is final (accepted by both parties) or if the ruling can be 
still appealed against by the taxpayer. As an appeal period may vary from 
Member State to Member State, the sending Member State should decide 
whether information about the ruling should be exchanged immediately 
when the ruling is issued or when the ruling is considered to be final.  In 
making this decision it should be borne in mind that time limit restrictions 
may be an issue for the recipient Member State of the information; 
Finally, the sending Member State should consider limitations arising from 
Article 17(4)3 of the Directive. 
                                                 
3   Article 17(4): "The provision of information may be refused where it would lead to the disclosure of a 
commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose 
disclosure would be contrary to public policy." 


5.2.  Unilateral APAs 
The exchange of information is intended to work as a two-step process.  The 
first stage would be a spontaneous exchange of important information about 
the unilateral APA which should enable the receiving Member State to decide 
whether a request for additional information under stage 2 was appropriate.   
To this end the initial spontaneous exchange should include the following 
information; 
(1) 
The name, address and tax registration number of the taxpayer to which the 
unilateral APA is granted;  
(2) 
The name, address and if available the tax registration number of the other 
participant to the controlled transaction for which the unilateral APA is 
granted including why it is considered as being a related party; 
(3) 
The period covered by the unilateral APA; 
(4) 
Information on all entities directly involved in the controlled transaction for 
which the unilateral APA is granted;   
(5) 
A short description of the transaction/business activity covered by the 
unilateral APA; 
(6) 
The transfer pricing method used and the price/margin agreed, as well as any 
other relevant terms of the unilateral APA, and; 
(7) 
The estimated value of the transactions covered by the unilateral APA. 
Finally, the sending Member State should consider limitations arising from 
Article 17(4)4 of the Directive. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6. 
FEEDBACK  
If the sending Member State has requested feedback, the decision maker/auditor in 
the receiving Member State shall provide feedback to its competent authority. The 
competent authority shall send feedback as soon as possible and no later than three 
                                                 
4   Article 17(4): "The provision of information may be refused where it would lead to the disclosure of a 
commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose 
disclosure would be contrary to public policy." 


months after the outcome of the use of the requested information is known (article 
14(1))5. 
Even if the sending Member State has not requested feedback, it is good practise to 
always send feedback to the sending Member State. Feedback on information sent 
will encourage administrative cooperation between Member States. 
7. 
MONITORING 
The Member States are responsible for providing statistics in line with the existing 
guidelines for statistics on spontaneous exchange of information which provide for 
an efficient and transparent analysis of the number of cross-border rulings and 
unilateral APAs sent and received per Member State. 
The Commission, based on statistical data provided by the Member States, will 
prepare summary tables on cross-border rulings and unilateral APAs. Tables will be 
made available to the Member States for the purpose of discussion in the Code of 
Conduct group. 
 
 
 
                                                 
5   Article 14(1): "Where a competent authority provides information pursuant to Articles 5 or 9, it may 
request the competent authority which receives the information to send feedback thereon. If feedback 
is requested, the competent authority which received the information shall, without prejudice to the 
rules on tax secrecy and data protection applicable in its Member State, send feedback to the 
competent authority which provided the information as soon as possible and no later than three months 
after the outcome of the use of the requested information is known. The Commission shall determine 
the practical arrangements in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2)." 
10