Comments on: Ugly Facts About China Transfer Pricing

By: Stan

Stan — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:14:21 +0000

Good deal. IP law can be labyrinthine and weird as well, but it never approaches the sheer flat-out technical nature of tax. My brain is not physically equipped to remain in continuous “tax law mode” for longer than, say, seven or eight minutes. After that, fluids begin to leak out my ears, and then things get really ugly.

By: Matthew McKee

Matthew McKee — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:09:00 +0000

No worries Stan. I will always defer to your wisdom on IP.

By: Stan

Stan — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:07:38 +0000

Thanks for the clarification. I stand by my earlier comments on how much I dislike tax law and try to avoid it . . .

By: Matthew McKee

Matthew McKee — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:57:36 +0000

I will generally agree with any post that talks up the hardship of China tax practices as its good for my business. However, in this case it should be pointed out that this is not truly strict deadline (and it is 20 days not 30). Companies have until 31 May (31 December this year as it is atransitional year) every year to prepare their TP contemporaneous documentation. Then upon request by the authorities they have 20 days to submit such documentation. Given the law, such companies should have (theoretically) already prepared this documentation and 20 day deadline should be relatively simple to comply with. Certain enterprises (those that suffer losses and have limited risks and functions) are required, in accordance with Circular 363, to submit within 20 days of the deadline irrespective of a request by the authorities. The difficult issue is for these companies and it is important for companies to ascertain whether they fall within that category.