Abstract
This article takes the position that Example 17 (on intangibles) of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines (2017), which focuses on the issue of control over a research activity and the relationship between control and entitlement to ownership of an intangible and the revenues it generates, is not grounded in theory or in empirical evidence under the arm’s length principle.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
