In this case, importer declared its OMV based on invoice price from principal irregardless whether principal is making profit or loss on the product sold. It is more of a transfer pricing issue. in most jurisdiction, when sales transaction involves 2 related parties, it should be done on "arms length" basis. But car from each manufacturers are different, how do tax authority determine "arm length" price?kenntona;665887 said:If you view the structure of import taxes, it is a function of ARF (100% of OMV) and excise tax (20%).
Does underclaring OMV tantamounts to tax evasion?
Distributor is not in the picture as Asia principle most likely the importer. It is not so straight forward unless tax authority is able to determine manufacturer is able to find "arm length" price.Jason8822;665942 said:If there are 3 parties involved in getting the car here, this is not so straight forward.
Manufacturer -> Asia Principle -> Distributor
Is under-invoicing a crime?davidtch said:In this case, importer declared its OMV based on invoice price from principal irregardless whether principal is making profit or loss on the product sold. It is more of a transfer pricing issue. in most jurisdiction, when sales transaction involves 2 related parties, it should be done on "arms length" basis. But car from each manufacturers are different, how do tax authority determine "arm length" price?
Under-invoicing between related parties - Yeskenntona;665965 said:Is under-invoicing a crime?