Harmful Tax Practices – 2023 Peer Review Reports on the Exchange of Information on Tax Rulings

198. Burkina Faso can legally issue the following four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) preferential regimes; (ii) rulings providing for unilateral downward adjustments; (iii) permanent establishment rulings; and (iv) related party conduit rulings.

199. For Burkina Faso, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued either: (i) on or after 1 January 2015 but before 1 April 2017; or (ii) on or after 1 January 2012 but before 1 January 2015, provided they were still in effect as at 1 January 2015.

200. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Burkina Faso could not issue rulings under the transparency framework before 2020, therefore this section is not evaluated.

201. For Burkina Faso, future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 April 2017.

202. The prior years’ reports indicated that there were no processes in place to keep track of rulings for the purposes of the transparency framework. Burkina Faso was recommended to finalise its information gathering process as soon as possible. As Burkina Faso is still taking steps to finalise its information gathering process, the recommendation remains in place.

203. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Burkina Faso did not yet have a review and supervision mechanism under the transparency framework. Therefore, Burkina Faso was recommended to put in place a review and supervision mechanism as soon as possible. As Burkina Faso has not yet put in place a review and supervision mechanism under the transparency framework for the year in review, the recommendation remains in place.

204.  Burkina Faso is recommended to finalise its information gathering process for identifying all relevant rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions and to implement a review and supervision mechanism, as soon as possible (ToR I.A).

205. Burkina Faso has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information spontaneously. Burkina Faso noted that there are no legal or practical impediments that prevent the spontaneous exchange of information on rulings as contemplated in the Action 5 minimum standard.

206. Burkina Faso has international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including: (i) the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol (OECD/Council of Europe, 2011[2]) (“the Convention”) and (ii) bilateral agreements in force with eight jurisdictions.1

207. In prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Burkina Faso did not put in place a process to complete the templates on relevant rulings, to make them available to the Competent Authority for exchange of information, and to exchange them with relevant jurisdictions. It is not known whether Burkina Faso has not yet put in place a process for exchanging information on decisions in accordance with the form and timelines required by the Transparency Framework. Therefore, this recommendation remains in force.

208. As no exchanges took place in the year of review, no data on the timeliness of exchanges can be reported.

209.  Burkina Faso is recommended to put in place a domestic legal framework allowing spontaneous exchange of information on rulings and to continue its efforts to complete the templates for all relevant rulings and to ensure that the exchanges of information on rulings occur as soon as possible (ToR II.B).

210. As no information on rulings was exchanged by Burkina Faso for the year in review, no statistics can be reported.

211. Burkina Faso does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015[3]) were imposed.

[1] OECD (2021), BEPS Action 5 on Harmful Tax Practices - Terms of Reference and Methodology for the Conduct of the Peer Reviews of the Action 5 Transparency Framework, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-action-5-harmful-tax-practices-peer-review-transparency-framework.pdf.

[3] OECD (2015), Countering Harmful Tax Practices More Effectively, Taking into Account Transparency and Substance, Action 5 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264241190-en.

[2] OECD/Council of Europe (2011), The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264115606-en.