Liechtenstein

732. Liechtenstein can legally issue the following four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) cross-border unilateral APAs and any other cross-border unilateral tax rulings (such as an advance tax ruling) covering transfer pricing or the application of transfer pricing principles; (ii) rulings providing for unilateral downward adjustments; (iii) permanent establishment rulings; and (iv) related party conduit rulings.

733. For Liechtenstein, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after January 2015 but before 1 April 2017; or (ii) on or after 1 January 2012 but before 1 January 2015, provided they were still in effect as at 1 January 2017. Future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 April 2017.

734. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Liechtenstein’s undertakings to identify past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. In addition, it was determined that Liechtenstein’s review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Liechtenstein’s implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

735. Liechtenstein has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process and no recommendations are made.

736. Liechtenstein has international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including being a party to (i) the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol (OECD/Council of Europe, 2011[4]) (“the Convention”) and (ii) bilateral agreements in force with 14 jurisdictions.1

737. For the year in review, the timeliness of exchanges is as follows:

738. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Liechtenstein’s process for the completion and exchange of templates were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. With respect to past rulings, no further action was required from Liechtenstein. Liechtenstein’s implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

739. Liechtenstein has the necessary legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information, a process for completing the templates in a timely way and has completed all exchanges. Liechtenstein has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process and no recommendations are made.

740. The statistics for the year in review are as follows:

741. Liechtenstein does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015[1]) were imposed.

References

[3] OECD (2021), BEPS Action 5 on Harmful Tax Practices - Terms of Reference and Methodology for the Conduct of the Peer Reviews of the Action 5 Transparency Framework, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-action-5-harmful-tax-practices-peer-review-transparency-framework.pdf.

[1] OECD (2015), Countering Harmful Tax Practices More Effectively, Taking into Account Transparency and Substance, Action 5 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264241190-en.

[2] OECD (ed.) (2017b), Harmful Tax Practices - 2017 Progress Report on Preferential Regimes, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264283954-en.

[4] OECD/Council of Europe (2011), The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264115606-en.

Notes

← 1. Participating jurisdictions to the Convention are available here: www.oecd.org/tax/exchange-of-tax-information/convention-on-mutual-administrative-assistance-in-tax-matters.htm. Liechtenstein also has bilateral agreements with Andorra, Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Jersey, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, San Marino, Singapore, United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom.

← 2. There were 15 unique exchanges, as three rulings fell into more than one category and were exchanged with more than one jurisdiction under the BEPS Action 5 report.

Metadata, Legal and Rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

© OECD 2021

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at http://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.