Transfer Pricing: In effect hits Coca Cola

NEW YORK — Coca-Cola was notified by the IRS that it owes $3.3 billion more in federal taxes, as well as interest, for 2007 to 2009, the company said Friday.

The Atlanta-based company said in a regulatory filing that it believes the assessments from the Internal Revenue Service are without merit and plans to pursue “all administrative and judicial remedies necessary to resolve the matter.”

The maker of Sprite, Dasani, Powerade and other drinks says the disagreement is over how much it should report as taxable income in the U.S., in relation with licensing that allows its foreign affiliates to sell products like soft drink concentrates to bottlers overseas.

It’s a tax issue that comes up frequently for multinational companies, said Robert Willens, president of a tax accounting consultancy in New York. He said companies tend to charge their foreign subsidiaries low licensing fees as a way to shift reportable income away from the U.S., where corporate tax rates are higher.

Typically, Willens said, the cases are settled for a fraction of the amount of the assessment.

“They hardly ever get to court, because neither party wants to experience the hazards of litigation,” Willens said.

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Coca-Cola said it has been following the same methodology for determining its taxable U.S. income for nearly 30 years.

“The IRS now seeks to depart from this long-standing practice in order to increase substantially the amount of tax,” the company said in a statement. “We are among hundreds of other companies currently facing these types of adjustments involving payments.”

Coca-Cola Co. said it was notified that a recommendation was made to the IRS’s chief counsel that the matter be designated for litigation. The company said it plans to start disputing the matter by filing a petition in U.S. Tax Court.

It said the IRS made the determination on owed taxes after a five-year audit.

Related Articles

Czech Republic vs RR Donnelley Transfer Pricing Case

The case Czech Republic vs. RR Donnelley Czech s.r.o. revolved around a transfer pricing dispute concerning the application of Section 23(7) of the Czech Income Tax Act (ITA). The core issue was whether RR Donnelley Czech s.r.o. had correctly applied the arm’s length principle in a transaction involving the purchase of hard disk drives (HDDs) on behalf of Banta Ireland, a related entity.

S.Africa: Summary of the Davis Tax Committee’s BEPS Sub-committee General Report released December 2014

Summary of the Davis Tax Committee’s BEPS Sub-committee General Report released December 2014 by Peter Dachs of ENS Introduction This note provides a summary of

India vs AON Consulting: TRANSFER PRICING CASE

The High Court of Delhi, in its ruling on AON Consulting Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 1 and Ors. (ITA 244/2024), addressed a crucial transfer pricing (TP) dispute concerning the application of Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) to transactions not covered under the agreement.

UK vs Royal Bank of Canada: International Tax Case

This case examines whether payments received by the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) under an oil exploration agreement were subject to UK taxation. The core issue concerns the interpretation of Article 6(2) of the UK/Canada Double Taxation Convention 1978, which governs the taxation of income derived from immovable property, including natural resources.

Responses