Belgium Transfer Pricing Policy
Bosnia and Herzegovina transfer pricing policy – Key Transfer Pricing rules in Bosnia and Herzegovina, documentation obligations, and compliance expectations under the Indirect Taxation Authority and relevant Entity Tax Administrations.
Please click on each section to expand further:
Introduction to Transfer Pricing in Belgium
Belgium follows the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines and applies the arm’s-length principle to all cross-border related-party transactions, including the sale of goods, intercompany services, licensing of intellectual property (IP), financial transactions, cost-sharing, head office charges, and business restructurings.
The Belgian Tax Authority places strong emphasis on economic substance, value creation, and proper documentation, particularly for multinationals with regional hubs or centralized service structures located in Belgium.
The fundamentals of Belgium’s TP framework include:
- Arm’s-Length Principle
- Intercompany transactions must reflect the pricing that would occur between independent parties under similar conditions.
- Mandatory TP Documentation
- Belgium requires a three-tier documentation model, fully aligned with BEPS Action 13:
- Master file
- Local file
- Country-by-Country report (CbCR), where applicable
- Large companies must also complete Form 275 LF (Local File form), containing detailed entity-level TP information.
- Functional & risk analysis (FAR)
- Belgium evaluates the functions performed, risks assumed, and assets used, including significant focus on DEMPE for intellectual property.
- Benchmarking obligations
- Comparable market data must support the arm’s-length nature of Belgian transactions.
- Enhanced focus on intra-group services
Belgium requires proof of:
- Actual benefit received
- Cost allocation methodology
- Mark-up justification
Belgium’s TP policy emphasizes the following areas:
- Substance over form
Profits must follow where value is created. Shell or low-substance entities face heightened scrutiny.
Centralized business models
Shared service centers, procurement hubs, treasury centers, and IP holding structures are examined closely to ensure they reflect actual operational reality.
- IP ownership & DEMPE
Belgium requires alignment between:
- Development
- Enhancement
- Maintenance
- Protection
- Exploitation
If a Belgian entity legally owns IP but does not perform DEMPE activities, profit allocation may be challenged.
- Financial transactions
Belgium follows OECD guidance on:
- Intercompany loans
- Cash pooling
- Guarantees
- Captive insurance
- Thin capitalization
- Substance, creditworthiness, and interest benchmarking are key.
- Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs)
Belgium offers unilateral, bilateral, and multilateral APAs, giving companies legal certainty on acceptable TP positions for 3–5 years.
Belgium is fully aligned with global standards, including:
- OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines
Belgium adopts the most recent OECD chapters, including financial transactions, hard-to-value intangibles, and revised transaction-profit methods guidance.
- BEPS Compliance
Belgium is a strong implementer of BEPS measures, particularly:
- BEPS Action 8–10 (TP alignment with value creation)
- BEPS Action 13 (documentation)
- BEPS Action 4 (interest deductibility)
- EU Framework Alignment
Belgium follows:
- EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum (EUJTPF) recommendations
- EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directives (ATAD I & II)
- Pillar Two global minimum tax rules
- Double Tax Treaties
Belgium’s extensive treaty network supports:
- Mutual Agreement Procedures (MAP)
- Treaty-based dispute resolution
- Elimination of double taxation
Documentation & Regulatory Requirements
Belgium fully implements OECD BEPS Actions 8–10 & Action 13, creating a robust Transfer Pricing governance environment.
Key BEPS-aligned features:
- Arm’s-length principle enforcement across all cross-border related-party transactions.
- Substance-based taxation, requiring alignment between value creation and profit allocation.
- Mandatory TP documentation, including master file, local file, and Form 275 LF annexes.
- Enhanced scrutiny of IP structures, especially those lacking DEMPE functions.
Focus areas under BEPS 8–10:
- Intangibles
- Risk allocation
- Business restructurings
- Intercompany services (management fees, cost allocations)
- Financial transactions and capital structure
Industries receiving highest BEPS audit focus in Belgium:
- Pharmaceuticals and life sciences
- Logistics and distribution
- Technology and digital services
- Centralized EU shared service centers
Belgium’s tax authority operates a specialized TP audit team with increasing use of data analytics, EU exchange-of-information tools, and joint audits.
Belgium fully implements OECD BEPS Actions 8–10 & Action 13, creating a robust Transfer Pricing governance environment.
Key BEPS-aligned features:
- Arm’s-length principle enforcement across all cross-border related-party transactions.
- Substance-based taxation, requiring alignment between value creation and profit allocation.
- Mandatory TP documentation, including master file, local file, and Form 275 LF annexes.
Enhanced scrutiny of IP structures, especially those lacking DEMPE functions.
Focus areas under BEPS 8–10:
- Intangibles
- Risk allocation
- Business restructurings
- Intercompany services (management fees, cost allocations)
- Financial transactions and capital structure
Industries receiving highest BEPS audit focus in Belgium:
- Pharmaceuticals and life sciences
- Logistics and distribution
- Technology and digital services
- Centralized EU shared service centers
Belgium’s tax authority operates a specialized TP audit team with increasing use of data analytics, EU exchange-of-information tools, and joint audits.
Belgium’s local TP compliance rules are among the most detailed in the EU due to multiple mandatory reporting layers.
- Mandatory TP documentation includes:
Master File (Form 275 MF)
Required if the Belgian group meets at least ONE of the following thresholds:
- Operating revenue > €50 million
- Balance sheet total > €1 billion
- Average employees > 100 full-time equivalents
- Local File (Form 275 LF)
Contains detailed entity-level information, including:
- Descriptions of intercompany transactions
- Functional analysis (FAR)
- Applied TP methods
- Benchmarking and financial results
Groups exceeding volume thresholds must also file detailed Local File Annexes per transaction category.
- Specific Transfer Pricing Form (275 LF Annex)
Required when intra-group transactions exceed:
- €1 million per transaction category (e.g., goods, services, financing)
- Audit and Penalty Framework
- Belgium actively performs TP audits, especially for high-risk sectors.
- Penalties apply for incomplete, late, or missing documentation.
- Lack of documentation may shift the burden of proof to the taxpayer.
Belgium has adopted the OECD/G20 Pillar 2 Global Minimum Tax Rules, effective for fiscal years starting 2024 onward, through the EU Minimum Tax Directive (ATAD 3 equivalent).
Key Pillar 2 elements implemented:
- 15% global minimum effective tax rate (ETR)
- Application to multinational groups with consolidated revenue ≥ €750 million
Belgium implements:
- Income Inclusion Rule (IIR)
- Undertaxed Profits Rule (UTPR)
- Qualified Domestic Minimum Top-Up Tax (QDMTT)
Impact on Transfer Pricing:
- TP policies must align with jurisdictional ETR calculations.
- Low-taxed Belgian entities (with incentives such as innovation income deduction or R&D credits) may trigger top-up tax.
Requires enhanced:
- Data collection
- Transaction-level transparency
- Substance documentation
- TP method consistency
Industries most affected in Belgium:
- Pharmaceutical & biotech
- Technology & digital services
- Manufacturing groups benefiting from innovation incentives
- Groups with centralized treasury or IP structures
Transfer Pricing Methods
- The CUP method is preferred when high-quality comparable data exists and when product characteristics or service terms are easily comparable.
- When CUP is typically applied in Belgium:
- Commodity transactions (chemicals, metals, energy products)
- Intercompany financing arrangements (interest rate benchmarking)
- Royalty rates for licensing of standardized IP
- Distribution of undifferentiated goods
- Financial services transactions
- Belgian tax authority position:
- CUP is considered the most reliable method when true comparables exist.
- Adjustments must be quantifiable and supported by evidence.
- Belgian TP auditors frequently challenge CUP analyses lacking robust comparability analysis.
Used primarily for distribution activities, especially where the Belgian entity resells products without significant value-adding functions.
- Typical use cases in Belgium:
- Limited-risk distributors
- EU regional sales hubs
- Intercompany trading of finished goods
- Contract-based reselling activities
Key considerations:
- Gross margin comparables must reflect Belgian market conditions.
- Adjustments may be needed for logistics, marketing intensity, or warranty functions.
- Frequently reviewed during Belgian TP audits due to the prevalence of distribution structures in Belgium.
Most commonly used for service centers, manufacturing units, and routine-risk functions operating in Belgium.
Common applications:
- Shared service centers (HR, finance, payroll, procurement)
- Contract manufacturers
- R&D support services (excluding DEMPE-related IP functions)
- Low-risk support or back-office services
Belgian tax expectations:
- Clear cost base definition (direct vs. indirect costs)
- Evidence supporting applied mark-up
- Benchmarking studies with EU comparables
- Alignment with substance requirements
Belgium closely reviews mark-ups in the 3%–10% range depending on the sector and risk profile.
The Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) is the most commonly applied method in Azerbaijan because:
- Reliable gross margin comparables are often limited.
- Net margin data is more widely available across regional and global databases.
- It suits complex transactions where only broad profitability indicators can be benchmarked.
Common applications:
- Limited-risk distributors
- Contract manufacturers
- Routine service providers
- Local subsidiaries of multinational groups
- Taxpayers benchmark the net profit margin (e.g., operating margin, return on assets) against comparable independent companies in the region or globally.
Used for integrated, highly interdependent operations, especially where unique intangibles exist on both sides of the transaction.
Common applications in Belgium:
- Joint development of technology or pharmaceuticals
- Shared IP exploitation arrangements
- Global trading or logistics networks
- Highly integrated group operations where separate testing is not reliable
Belgian tax authority expectations:
- Comprehensive DEMPE analysis
- Clear allocation keys based on value creation
- Transparent documentation of profit drivers and contributions
Belgium supports the method particularly for multinational R&D-heavy industries, where both parties contribute significant intangibles.
Analytical & Compliance Support
A comparability analysis is a fundamental requirement in all Belgian Transfer Pricing documentation (Local File, Master File, and Benchmarking Studies). The goal is to ensure that intercompany transactions reflect arm’s-length pricing.
Key Elements of Belgian Comparability Analysis:
- Industry and market assessment aligned with EU comparables
- Functional characteristics of the parties involved
- Economic circumstances affecting price fluctuations
- Contractual terms and risk allocation
- Business strategies, particularly in restructuring cases
Belgium-specific expectations:
- Use of European comparables (not global) unless clearly justified
- Multi-year comparables to smooth out fluctuations
- Full transparency on screening criteria, rejected comparables & adjustments
- Consistency across Local File, Master File, and TP policy
Belgian auditors review comparability analyses very closely—especially for distribution, manufacturing, and service entities operating under limited-risk models.
The FAR (Functions–Assets–Risks) analysis is the core analytical tool used to demonstrate value creation and justify profit allocation within multinational groups.
Required components of a FAR Analysis in Belgium:
- Functions Analysis
- Manufacturing, assembly, or processing activities
- Sales, marketing, and customer relationship management
- R&D and development functions
- Procurement, supply chain, and logistics functions
- Support functions (HR, finance, admin, IT)
- Assets Analysis
- Tangible assets (plants, machinery, equipment)
- Intangible assets:
- trademarks
- patents
- proprietary technology
- marketing intangibles
- Financial assets and capital employed
- Risk Analysis
Belgium requires explicit identification and allocation of risks, such as:
- Market risk
- Inventory and capacity risk
- Credit and financing risk
- Operational and supply chain risk
- Product liability and warranty risk
- IP development and commercialization risk
Belgian Tax Authority Expectations:
- Deep alignment with OECD’s DEMPE framework for intangible assets
- Clear identification of the “economically significant” risks
- Evidence of control over risks and financial capacity
- Role-based justification for selecting the tested party in benchmarking
A strong FAR analysis is essential in Belgium, especially due to heightened audits in sectors like pharmaceuticals, chemicals, logistics, and high-tech services.
Trends, Challenges & Real-World Impacts
Businesses operating in Belgium face several Transfer Pricing challenges driven by heightened regulatory scrutiny and evolving OECD requirements. Key challenges include:
- Increased audit intensity, especially in pharmaceutical, chemical, logistics, and digital sectors
- Complex DEMPE-driven intangible asset assessments, requiring detailed documentation
- Difficulty obtaining reliable EU comparables for benchmarking certain niche industries
- Strict expectations for economic substance, including risk control and financial capacity
- Requirement for local-specific justifications in the Belgian Local File (Form 275 LF)
Belgium’s tax authority (BGA) places strong emphasis on coherence between the Master File, Local File, and Intercompany Agreements, making consistency across documents essential.
Belgium’s Transfer Pricing landscape is shifting alongside global initiatives. The most relevant trends include:
- Greater reliance on DEMPE analysis for IP-heavy industries
- Rising scrutiny of intra-group services, including management fees and cost allocations
- Focus on value-chain alignment, especially for centralized European business models
- Increased demand for benchmarking transparency, including selection rationale for comparables
- Growth of APAs and cooperative compliance programs as businesses seek certainty
Companies are adapting by investing in robust TP policy frameworks, stronger documentation, and proactive risk assessments.
- Recent developments shaping Belgium’s TP environment include:
- Belgium’s implementation of Pillar 2 (15% minimum tax) and its interaction with Transfer Pricing rules
- Updated audit guidelines emphasising risk control, DEMPE alignment, and economic substance
- APA program expansion, with more sectors eligible for unilateral and bilateral APAs
- EU-level initiatives impacting Belgium, such as BEFIT and cross-border loss relief proposals
- Increased digitalisation of tax filings, including enhanced Local File data validation
- These regulatory updates reflect Belgium’s intention to closely align with OECD guidance while strengthening local enforcement.
Recent domestic and international events have significantly influenced TP enforcement and taxpayer behaviour.
Key impacts:
- Regional geopolitical fluctuations
Supply chain disruptions and pricing volatility force companies to reassess arm’s-length margins. - Commodity price instability
Oil and gas price swings affect comparability and increase disputes on profit allocation. - Accelerated digital transformation
Remote service models and cross-border digital payments now attract heightened TP scrutiny. - Government focus on revenue mobilisation
TP audits are used as a strategic tool to ensure appropriate taxation of multinational businesses. - Exchange rate volatility
FX fluctuations complicate benchmarking and require careful adjustments to maintain compliance.
Use Cases by Business Size & Industry
Why it matters:
Belgium has a fast-growing startup ecosystem, especially in biotech, AI, fintech, and logistics technology. Even small companies can create IP or enter cross-border arrangements that trigger Transfer Pricing expectations.
Key considerations for Belgian startups:
- Early-stage IP creation
Startups frequently develop proprietary technology, algorithms, or R&D assets.
Belgium’s tax authority expects clear DEMPE mapping (Development, Enhancement, Maintenance, Protection, Exploitation).
- Funding arrangements
Seed and VC funding can involve related-party financing.
Startups must justify interest rates, capital structure, and cash-burn-phase risks.
- Service-based models
Many startups provide or receive services within a group — IT development, marketing, shared resources.
Usually benchmarked with TNMM or cost-plus approaches.
- R&D incentives
Belgium offers R&D tax credits, innovation income deductions, and partial wage exemptions.
TP positions must align with who owns IP and which entity controls the risk.
Overall: Startups must balance flexibility with documentation discipline to avoid misalignment during rapid growth or fundraising rounds.
Why it matters:
Belgian SMEs often operate cross-border, supply chain–heavy, or service-driven business models. The tax authority actively audits SMEs, not just large MNEs.
Key considerations for SMEs:
- Distribution and supply chain operations
- SMEs commonly import/export goods within group structures.
- Belgium expects consistent margins, benchmarking, and alignment with functional roles (limited-risk distributor vs. full-risk entrepreneur).
- Intragroup services
- Management fees, IT services, HR support, and logistics services require:
- clear evidence of benefit received
- cost allocation logic
- arm’s length markup
- Manufacturing entities
Belgium has strong manufacturing clusters.
TP must reflect:
- asset intensity
- production risks
- capacity utilisation
- quality control roles
- Intangible asset use
SMEs often rely on group trademarks, proprietary processes, or licenses.
Royalty rates must follow OECD+EU norms with explicit risk allocation.
- Increased audit activity
Belgian authorities frequently review SMEs for:
- excessive management fees
- low margins in distribution
- unsubstantiated royalties
- insufficient FAR analysis
- inconsistent reporting across EU operations
Overall: SMEs need structured documentation and benchmarking because Belgium is one of the most TP-active jurisdictions in the EU — even for mid-sized groups.
Dispute Resolution & Advance Agreements
- Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs) in Belgium
- Belgium is one of the most APA-friendly jurisdictions in the EU, offering taxpayers a proactive way to achieve Transfer Pricing certainty. The Belgian Ruling Commission (BRC) manages APA applications and is known for cooperative engagement.
- Key Features of APAs in Belgium
Availability of unilateral, bilateral & multilateral APAs
Belgium enables:
- Unilateral APAs (Belgium only)
- Bilateral APAs (with a treaty partner)
- Multilateral APAs (multiple jurisdictions)
These are particularly helpful for companies with cross-border distribution, financing, IP licensing, and contract manufacturing operations. - Clear guidance for complex TP structures
- APAs commonly cover:
- Limited-risk distribution margins
- Contract manufacturing remuneration
- Intragroup financing spreads
- Royalty and IP licensing rates
- Shared service center markups
- DEMPE-based IP allocations
Belgium’s APA practice is highly aligned with the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines.
- Typical APA process in Belgium
- Pre-filing meeting with the Ruling Commission
- Submission of detailed functional, financial, and factual documentation
- Negotiation phase on risk allocation, benchmarks, method selection
- Ruling / agreement issuance (usually 5-year validity)
- Annual compliance review
- Benefits of APAs in Belgium
- Certainty over future TP positions
- Avoidance of double taxation
- Reduced audit exposure
- Predictable cash-flow and margin outcomes
- Strong alignment with Belgium’s cooperative tax administration approach
APAs are highly recommended for industries that face frequent scrutiny: pharmaceuticals, chemicals, logistics hubs, high-tech manufacturing, and centralized service centers.
Belgium places strong emphasis on prevention rather than litigation, with several mechanisms designed to avoid disputes before they escalate.
- Key Dispute-Avoidance Channels
Proactive engagement with the Belgian Tax Authority - Belgium encourages early dialogue, allowing taxpayers to clarify positions before audits become contentious.
- Advance decisions (rulings) beyond APAs
The Ruling Commission also offers non-APA rulings on:
- Permanent establishment questions
- IP income deduction
- Group financing structures
- Intragroup service arrangements
- Asset valuations and restructurings
- These rulings help resolve uncertainty well before filing tax returns.
- MAP (Mutual Agreement Procedure) & EU Arbitration
Belgium has extensive treaty coverage and strong participation in:
- OECD MAP
- EU Arbitration Convention
- This ensures efficient relief from double taxation in cross-border TP disputes.
- Cooperative compliance environment
- Belgium follows a trust-based approach, meaning well-documented taxpayers receive smoother audits and faster resolutions.
- Focus on documentation quality
Taxpayers who present:
- a robust FAR analysis,
- aligned benchmarking,
- consistent intercompany agreements,
face significantly fewer disputes. - Why dispute avoidance is essential in Belgium
Because Belgium’s audits have increased for:
- management fees,
- royalty payments,
- low distributor margins,
- headquarters service charges,
- financing spreads,
a proactive strategy greatly reduces risk.
