Who we work with...

Why OECD Guidelines Matter?

BEPS Action 13 ensures multinational groups maintain a clear and consistent picture of their global operations. It strengthens compliance, reduces tax avoidance risks, and promotes fairness in profit attribution across jurisdictions. Standardized reporting fosters transparency and builds trust between companies and tax administrations.

BEPS Action 13 For CFOs

For CFOs, BEPS Action 13 brings structure to compliance and tax governance. It enables clearer communication between global entities, auditors, and investors. By implementing consistent reporting systems, CFOs can reduce risk, simplify audits, and enhance accountability in group-level tax management.

BEPS Action 13 For Tax Managers

Tax Managers rely on BEPS Action 13 to guide documentation and transparency. The Master File outlines global operations, the Local File captures entity-level details, and the Country-by-Country Report summarizes profits, taxes, and activities. This approach supports consistent, defendable compliance across all jurisdictions.

For CEOs, compliance with BEPS Action 13 demonstrates commitment to integrity and transparency. It signals that the business meets international tax standards, strengthening reputation, investor confidence, and trust with regulators in every jurisdiction of operation.

BEPS Action 13 For CEOs

BEPS Action 13 OECD Guidelines Reference

BEPS Action 13 OECD Guidelines Reference
The OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines (2022) formally integrate BEPS Action 13 as the foundation for consistent, transparent documentation, requiring all multinational groups to maintain the three-tiered reporting framework globally.

Common BEPS Action 13 Mistakes

Even diligent organizations make BEPS documentation errors. These usually stem from inconsistent data, poor system integration, or a lack of coordination between functions. Addressing them early helps ensure transparency and alignment across the group.

Incomplete Master or Local Files

Failing to include sufficient detail on intercompany transactions, value drivers, or benchmarking studies weakens compliance. Missing DEMPE or functional data undermines credibility. A complete set of records must link local documentation to the global narrative presented in the Master File.

Inconsistent Country-by-Country Data

Discrepancies between Country-by-Country Reports and audited financial statements signal potential red flags. Data misalignment can trigger audits or penalties. Ensuring consistent figures across systems, entities, and reports is critical for maintaining transparency and avoiding regulator scrutiny.

Treating BEPS documentation as an annual checkbox task results in outdated reporting. Business restructures, acquisitions, or new markets demand updated analyses. Regularly refreshing Master and Local Files keeps documentation aligned with current business and regulatory realities.

Static Documentation Practices

When tax, finance, and legal teams work separately, inconsistencies appear in transfer pricing narratives. These gaps create audit vulnerabilities and erode confidence with regulators. Coordinated, cross-functional reporting ensures accuracy, coherence, and timely compliance across the organization.

Siloed Reporting Processes

Neglecting Data Governance Controls

Failing to maintain a centralized data governance framework leads to version errors, duplication, and outdated inputs. Strong governance ensures data accuracy, ownership, and traceability across systems. It builds confidence that BEPS documentation is reliable, compliant, and audit-ready every year.

Assuming a single global BEPS format satisfies all jurisdictions causes compliance gaps. Local tax authorities may impose additional requirements. Tailoring Master and Local Files to each jurisdiction’s specific rules ensures accuracy, reduces audit exposure, and supports full OECD alignment.

Ignoring Local Compliance Variations