원가분담약정 중도참여대가에 관한 미국 법원의 최근 판례에 대한 소고

With the recent rapid growth of information technology (IT) companies, the transaction of intangible assets is increasing and there is also an increasing number of grant-of-right cases to the overseas related party as a substantial owner of the existing intangible assets owned by the head office and the intangible assets developed after a cost sharing arrangement and a buy-in payment between the head office and the overseas related party. In this regards, the U.S. tax authorities have raised issues, arguing that the intangible assets in the United States were transferred overseas at a low price. This study examined the Amazon case (Amazon v. Commissioner, 148 T.C. No. 8) of U.S. Tax Court regarding the buy-in payment in the cost sharing arrangement concluded in Mar. 2017. In other cost sharing arrangement cases between head office and subsidiary, the ownership of intangible assets already held by the head office was granted jointly to the subsidiary and based on applicable intangible assets, new intangible assets were developed in most cases. In this respect, the subsidiary that participated in cost sharing arrangement has an amount to pay to the head office holding the existing technology. However, transfer pricing methods for the buy-in payment were not specified in the Law for the Coordination of International Tax Affairs of Korea. Thus, taxpayers are difficult to calculate the arm’s length price of the buy-in payment. To solve such problems, it is thought that it would be necessary to introduce specific provisions in the Law for the Coordination of International Tax Affairs regarding calculation methods for expected benefits, contribution values, and the buy-in payment that are all required to determine contribution amounts between the participating companies in the cost sharing arrangement.