Consolidated Report on Amount B

Whereas, the competent authority of [Jurisdiction A] and the competent authority of [Jurisdiction B] (hereinafter referred to as “Competent Authorities”) wish to provide tax certainty with respect to the application of the simplified and streamlined approach in Annex of Chapter IV of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations [as adopted on [XXX] and amended on [XXX] [and as may be updated from time to time] (hereinafter “OECD Guidelines”) by [Jurisdiction A – the covered jurisdiction];

This arrangement is entered into under paragraph [3] of Article [25] of [the official title of the Double Tax Convention between [Jurisdiction A] and [Jurisdiction B]] (the “Convention”) with a view to applying Article [9] and [25] of the Convention to in-scope qualifying transactions;

Where a qualifying transaction that is in scope of the simplified and streamlined approach is the subject of a mutual agreement procedure case presented to the Competent Authorities pursuant to paragraph [1] of Article [25] of the Convention, the Competent Authorities will intend to resolve such case by applying the simplified and streamlined approach to that qualifying transaction;

The Competent Authorities have agreed as follows:

1. For the purposes of this Agreement:

2. For the purposes of applying this Agreement, the qualifying transactions under this Agreement are in-scope of the simplified and streamlined approach if they satisfy the criteria set out in the Guidance.

1. For the purposes of this Agreement, the applicable upper bound of the operating expenses-to-net revenues criterion given by the Guidance in [Jurisdiction A] is [X]%.

1. The return of in-scope qualifying transactions under this Agreement should be determined based on the Guidance [as it may be amended or supplemented by subsequent work that has been incorporated into the OECD Guidelines on the simplified and streamlined approach].

2. When the simplified and streamlined approach is used by the tax administration of [Jurisdiction A] or a taxpayer elects to apply the approach in [Jurisdiction A], the Competent Authorities agree that the return for a tested party involved in in-scope qualifying transactions, calculated in accordance with the Guidance and this Agreement, will be treated as providing an acceptable approximation of an arm’s length outcome for the purposes of the provisions of Article [9] of the Convention.

1. When a mutual agreement procedure case under paragraph [1] of Article [25] of the Convention, in line with the conditions therein, is presented on the basis that the actions of [Jurisdiction A] involving in-scope qualifying transactions under this Agreement result or will result in taxation not in accordance with Article [9] of the Convention, the Competent Authorities will apply the Guidance to endeavour to resolve the case by mutual agreement with a view to the avoidance of taxation which is not in accordance with the Convention, when applying paragraph [2] of Article [25].

2. The Competent Authority of [Jurisdiction B] will treat the outcome of the application of the simplified and streamlined approach in [Jurisdiction A] as providing an acceptable approximation of an arm’s length outcome in a mutual agreement procedure case presented under paragraph [1] of Article [25] of the Convention when the Competent Authority of [Jurisdiction B] verifies that:

3. Whenever possible, when presented with a case as described in paragraph 1, the Competent Authority of [Jurisdiction B] will unilaterally make an appropriate adjustment under [paragraph 2 of Article 9 of the Convention] or otherwise provide a satisfactory solution.

1. When a downward adjustment to the profits of an enterprise is made using either the simplified and streamlined approach or the remainder of the OECD Guidelines for in-scope qualifying transactions in a Jurisdiction about which the relevant Competent Authority of that Jurisdiction has knowledge, that Competent Authority will, under Article [26] of the Convention or any other similar means available, notify the Competent Authority of the other Jurisdiction of such downward adjustment in a timely manner with a view to preventing any potential double non-taxation.

1. If any difficulties in the implementation or interpretation of this Agreement arise, either Competent Authority may request consultations with the other Competent Authority to develop appropriate measures to ensure that the objectives of this Agreement are fulfilled.

2. This Agreement may be amended with the written consent of both Competent Authorities. Unless otherwise agreed upon, such an amendment is effective for qualifying transactions completed on the first day of the month following the signature of such written consent.

1. This Agreement will apply to qualifying transactions [on or after 1 January 2025 (if it is signed before 2025) or on the first day of the month following the last signature to this Agreement (if it is signed on or after 1 January 2025].

2. Either Competent Authority may terminate this Agreement by giving notice of termination in writing to the other Competent Authority. Such termination will become effective [immediately / on the first day of the month following the expiration of a period of [12] months after the date of the notice of termination]. In such event, this agreement will cease to be applicable to qualifying transactions taking place on or after the date of termination.

Signed in […] on […]. Signed in […] on […].

Competent Authority for [Jurisdiction A] Competent Authority for [Jurisdiction B]