Preparation of benchmark analyses
Comparative analysis, also known as benchmarking, is a mandatory element of transfer pricing documentation for most taxpayers performing intragroup transactions. The exemption from the obligation to have a benchmarking analysis applies primarily to micro or small businesses and transactions covered by simplified “safe harbor” settlement rules.
The purpose of the comparative analysis is to document the market nature of transactions between related parties by presenting data on transactions carried out in the market between unrelated parties or data on entities engaged in similar business activities.
In addition, the results of the comparative analysis are presented in the transfer pricing information in forms TPR-C or TPR-P.
Who is it for?
- Do you run a capital group with intra-group transactions?
- A new transaction is planned within your capital group?
- Have you carried out a reorganization within your capital group?
- Your company is part of an international group of companies performing intra-group transactions?
Our support scope - preparation of a comparative analysis for the transaction:
- commodities,
- services,
- financial,
- royalties,
- restructuring of operations.
Contact one of our experts on transfer pricing
Winning the case before the Supreme Administrative Court
on tax control for 2013 and determination of tax liability. Ref. act II FSK 585/20
Winning the case before the Supreme Administrative Court
regarding the Company's CIT exemption. Ref. act II FSK 1250/22
Winning case before the Voivodeship Administrative Court
on alleged abuse of VAT law. Ref. no. III Sa/Wa 203/22
Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court, ref. no. I FSK 1816/20
The court objected to the very common approach among the tax authorities, but also often among the courts, of attributing an implicit awareness of participation in a fraud by pointing out that the evidence on the record did not show that such awareness existed. The court ordered that very precise criteria be taken into account that would make such awareness of fraud plausible.
Judgment of the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw (III SA/Wa 2555/20)
Judgment on abuse of rights. The court questioned the authorities' instrumental attempts to apply the concept of abuse of rights, pointing out that the conditions for abuse were not met in the evidence on the record.
Winning case before the CJEU. C-395/09
The right to deduct input tax when purchasing services from countries considered to be tax havens, Oasis East Ltd.
Winning case before the CJEU. C-395/09
The incompatibility with Community law of Polish provisions concerning the restriction of the right of entrepreneurs to deduct VAT on the purchase of passenger cars and fuel for them, Magoora Sp. z o.o.
Winning case before the CJEU. C-313/05
Excise duty levied on imported second-hand cars in connection with their first registration in Poland, Maciej Brzezinski
Most conducted and won cases when representing taxpayers before the CJEU among all Polish attorneys.
Jerzy Martini - author and co-author of Commentary on the VAT Directive (Unimex ed.)
Jerzy Martini - author, co-author and editor of Commentary to the VAT Act (publ. C.H.Beck)
Jerzy Martini - author and co-author of "VAT in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice" (publ. C.H.Beck)
Marek Wojda - co-author of Commentary on the VAT Directive (Unimex ed.) and the VAT Act (C.H.Beck ed.)
Featured in the 'Law firm on Linkedin - a practical guide' by legal marketing agency Tomczak Stanisławski.
Repeatedly recognised in the rankings of Rzeczpospolita and Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
We teach at universities, including the School of Economics
Jerzy Martini honoured annually in the prestigious Chambers & Partners ranking, indicated as Band I (highest possible level) in the individual ranking of tax advisers in the Tax Consultants category.