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

283. Costa Rica can legally issue the following two types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) cross-border unilateral APAs and any other cross-border unilateral tax rulings (such as an advance tax ruling) covering transfer pricing or the application of transfer pricing principles; and (ii) permanent establishment rulings.

284. For Costa Rica, 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. Future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 April 2017.

285. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Costa Rica’s undertakings to identify past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. In addition, it was determined that Costa Rica’s review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Costa Rica’s implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

286. Costa Rica has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process and no recommendations are made.

287. Costa Rica has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information spontaneously. Costa Rica notes 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.

288. Costa Rica 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”), (ii) the Convention on Mutual Assistance and Technical Cooperation between Tax and Customs Administrations of Central America, (iii) bilateral agreements in force with four jurisdictions and (iv) tax information exchange agreements in force with two jurisdictions.1

289. During the year in review, no exchanges were required to take place and no data on the timeliness of exchanges is reported.

290. In the prior years’ peer review reports, it was determined that Costa Rica’s process for the completion and exchange of templates were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Costa Rica’s implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.

291. Costa Rica has the necessary legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information, a process for completing the templates in a timely way and has completed all exchanges. Costa Rica has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process and no recommendations are made.

292. As no rulings were issued, no statistics can be reported.

293. Costa Rica 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.