Cara Avocats

CARA'porteur public: what are the effects of settlement periods in transfer pricing analysis?

The Administrative Court of Appeal has ruled in favor of the Clarins group in a dispute with the French tax authorities. The case, which concerned transfer pricing and payment deadlines between subsidiaries, could have major repercussions for international groups operating in France.

The background to the case

The case dates back to the 2005 and 2006 tax years, when the tax authorities carried out an audit of Clarins SA's accounts. The tax authorities criticized Clarins for granting its foreign subsidiaries abnormally long payment terms, without interest, while incurring factoring costs for these receivables. The tax authorities saw this as an indirect transfer of profits abroad, a practice sanctioned by article 57 of the CGI.

Judicial reversal

After an initial rejection of its request by the Montreuil Administrative Court, Clarins appealed the decision. The CAA not only annulled the court's decision on grounds of insufficient reasoning, but also ruled in Clarins' favor on the merits of the case.

The decisive arguments

The court noted that the comparisons provided by the tax authorities, which were intended to prove the abnormal nature of the payment delays, were deemed irrelevant. The Court considered that these comparisons did not take into account the specificities of Clarins' business sector and the particular nature of its transactions.

The implications of the decision

This decision is a landmark in the field of transfer pricing tax audits. It underlines the importance for tax authorities of providing precise and relevant comparative data when seeking to demonstrate the existence of an advantage granted between related companies.

For international groups, this ruling is a reminder of the importance of carefully documenting their transfer pricing and payment terms policies, taking into account the specific features of their business sector.

Share this article: