Seychelles

1001. Seychelles can legally issue the following five types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) preferential regimes;1 (ii) 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; (iii) rulings providing for unilateral downward adjustments; (iv) permanent establishment rulings; and (v) related party conduit rulings.

1002. For Seychelles, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after 1 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 2015. Future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 April 2017.

1003. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Seychelles’ 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 Seychelles’ review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Seychelles’ implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard. It is noted that the Seychelles Revenue Commission (SRC) is continuing to develop a new form to request a private ruling to capture all the needed information. Until that takes place, Seychelles would continue to use its information gathering powers under the Revenue Administration Act to obtain information on all potential exchange jurisdictions.

1004. Seychelles has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process that can be met in the absence of exchanges being issued and no recommendations are made.

1005. Seychelles 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 28 jurisdictions.2

1006. As Seychelles did not issue any past or future rulings within the scope of the transparency framework in the relevant periods, Seychelles did not exchange any information on rulings in the year in review and no data on the timeliness of exchanges can be reported.

1007. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Seychelles’ process for the completion and exchange of templates were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. With respect to past rulings, no action was required. Seychelles’ implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

1008. Seychelles has the necessary legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information and a process for completing the templates in a timely way. Seychelles has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process that can be met in the absence of exchanges being issued and no recommendations are made.

1009. As no rulings were issued, no statistics can be reported.

1010. Seychelles offered three intellectual property regimes (IP regime)3 that were abolished as of 1 January 2019 and not subject to the transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015[1]), because:

  • New entrants benefitting from the grandfathered IP regime: the IP regimes have been abolished without grandfathering for taxpayers entering after the relevant date from which enhanced transparency obligations apply. As such, no enhanced transparency requirements apply.

  • Third category of IP assets: not applicable as the IP regimes have been abolished.

  • Taxpayers making use of the option to treat the nexus ratio as a rebuttable presumption: not applicable as the IP regimes have been abolished.

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. With respect to the following preferential regimes: 1) International business companies, 2) Companies special license, 3) International trade zone licensees, 4) Offshore banking, 5) Non domestic insurance business, 6) Fund administration business, 7) Securities business under the securities act and 8) Reinsurance business.

← 2. 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. Seychelles also has bilateral agreements with Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Bermuda, Botswana, China (People’s Republic of), Cyprus, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Guernsey, Indonesia, Isle of Man, Jersey, Kenya, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mauritius, Monaco, Oman, Qatar, San Marino, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam and Zambia.

← 3. These regimes are: 1) International business companies; 2) Companies special license; and 3) International trade zone.

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.