Italy clarifies key transfer pricing tenants

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement


Italy clarifies key transfer pricing tenants

italy-flag.jpg

Italy’s tax authority clarified a number of transfer pricing regulations at the nation’s annual tax conference, Telefisco. Salvatore Mattia and Federico Vincenti from Crowe Valente explore the key changes surrounding penalty protections and discrepancies in tax filings.

During Telefisco 2019, Italy’s annual tax conference, Italy’s tax authority clarified several transfer pricing (TP) tenants. Notably, the most important include:

a) Clarification regarding when penalty protection may be applied to TP documentation; and

b) The inapplicability of penalties for filing discrepant tax returns in the TP area.

Penalty protection

In accordance with Article 1, Paragraph 6, and Article 2, Paragraph 4 of Legislative Decree No. 471/1997, if a taxpayer provides the authorities with adequate documentation that shows TP policy was applied appropriately within intercompany transactions, penalties for administrative violations related to tax return discrepancies may not apply (i.e. “penalty protection”).

However, taxpayers who benefit from this exemption are required to provide all the necessary documentation to allow the tax authority to carry out a complete analysis on the TP policy applied on the intercompany transactions (“suitability” of TP documentation).

Any difference between the TP methods and the selection of comparable transactions/companies which have been chosen by the taxpayer within the TP documentation during the tax audit is not considered relevant in assessing the suitability of TP documentation.

Furthermore, compliance with the applicable regulation does not imply the suitability of such documentation.

Therefore, it is important that the documents provided by the taxpayer to the tax auditors facilitate in understanding the TP policy applied and its compliance with the arm’s-length principle.

Discrepancies in tax returns

Italian tax authorities have further clarified that tax returns filed with discrepancies in the TP area are not liable for penalty. However, in the case of TP adjustments, fraudulent declarations may be applied as a penalty instead.

In accordance with Article 4 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000, which was amended by Legislative Decree No. 158/2015, a tax return discrepancy offence occurs when a taxpayer discloses an income that is smaller than the actual amount, or non-existent liabilities under the following joint circumstances:

  • The total evaded tax is higher than EUR 150,000 ($170,000); and

  • The total amount of non-disclosed income/profit, also through non-existent loss elements, is higher than 10% of the total amount filed in the tax return, or higher than EUR 3 million.

The novelty relies on the fact that the new provision replaces the expression “fictitious loss elements” with “non-existent loss elements”.

Consequently, as confirmed by Italy’s tax authority, TP adjustments may not be considered a tax offence in light of their estimated values.

Salvatore Mattia

Salvatore Mattia

 

Federico Vincenti

Federico Vincenti

This article was written by Salvatore Mattia and Federico Vincenti of Valente Associati GEB Partners/ Crowe Valente.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

It was also a memorable night for Galicia, KPMG, Skadden and Pinheiro Neto, all of which scooped major awards at a gala ceremony in New York
The former Deloitte UK CEO earned a 45% raise in a year when 1,000 staff reportedly lost their jobs – and the pay gap is only getting bigger
In a seminal development for big law, the 95-year-old firm is set to cease operations after a series of high-profile partner departures
UK Chancellor John Healey extended a VAT cut, suspended tariffs, increased a bank surcharge and vowed to increase funding for HMRC
Kristine Riisberg warned that TP decisions can determine top-up tax exposure under pillar two, while global consensus over the rules remains unsettled
Both Germany’s NIS2 and the EU AI Act now determine whether a tax function can meet its obligations – and both can make management personally accountable
Originators, loan purchasers and securitisation vehicles may need to revisit servicing agreements and pricing after a key judgment narrowed the VAT credit management exemption
Opening doors for existing talent within Baker McKenzie and a desire for enhanced legal capabilities informed Ricardo Perera’s switch from KPMG
Boaz Goren’s move to the upstart PE-backed firm takes the number of senior UK tax professionals who have left EY this year to 13
The allegations against Deloitte Cyprus raise uncomfortable questions about how far the big four can distance themselves from misconduct at member firms
Gift this article