Georgia Transfer Pricing Policy
Georgia transfer pricing policy – Key Transfer Pricing rules in Georgia, documentation obligations, and compliance expectations under the Revenue Service of Georgia.
Please click on each section to expand further:
Introduction to Transfer Pricing in Georgia
Georgia’s transfer pricing framework is built on the arm’s length principle and is primarily governed by the Tax Code of Georgia, supported by detailed regulations issued by the Georgian Revenue Service (GRS). The rules apply to both domestic and cross-border related-party transactions, ensuring that pricing outcomes reflect fair market conditions and prevent artificial profit shifting. Georgia’s system draws heavily from the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, incorporating internationally recognized methods, comparability standards, and documentation expectations. As part of its compliance approach, the GRS closely evaluates economic substance, functional profiles, and value creation within multinational and local groups, making reliable and defensible transfer pricing documentation essential for companies operating in the country.
Georgia’s Transfer Pricing system is based on the arm’s length principle, requiring market-aligned pricing for all intercompany transactions.
The framework incorporates OECD-aligned standards for comparability analysis, functional analysis, and economic rationale.
Taxpayers must use accepted Transfer Pricing methods and justify their selection with appropriate benchmarks.
Documentation must demonstrate that profits reported in Georgia reflect actual economic activities and functions performed.
Strong emphasis is placed on robust, defensible Transfer Pricing structures supported by reliable data and economic analysis.
The regulations outline detailed requirements for documentation, Transfer Pricing methods, and compliance reviews.
The GRS focuses on high-risk areas such as services, royalties, financial transactions, and management fees.
Intercompany pricing must reflect economic realism, value creation, and arm’s length comparability.
Benchmarking studies and economic analyses are essential to defend pricing positions during audits.
Companies must maintain contemporaneous documentation to reduce exposure to adjustments and penalties.
Georgia is continuously updating its Transfer Pricing framework to align with global OECD standards and BEPS initiatives.
International alignment influences documentation requirements, risk assessment, and audit expectations.
Authorities focus increasingly on economic substance and accurate profit allocation across jurisdictions.
Georgia’s integration with global tax reforms enhances enforcement capabilities and transparency.
Multinational companies operating in Georgia must anticipate evolving requirements and strengthen compliance systems accordingly.
Documentation & Regulatory Requirements
Georgia has adopted OECD BEPS-aligned Transfer Pricing principles, embedding arm’s length standards into domestic tax legislation to address profit shifting and ensure fair taxation.
The Revenue Service of Georgia enforces comprehensive Transfer Pricing documentation obligations, including Master File and Local File requirements consistent with BEPS Action 13.
Multinational enterprises operating in Georgia must demonstrate economic substance, value creation, and functional contributions to support intercompany pricing arrangements.
Transfer Pricing audits have become more intensive, with heightened focus on intra-group financing, intangible assets, and transactions involving business restructurings.
Failure to comply with Georgia’s BEPS-aligned requirements may result in significant penalties, Transfer Pricing adjustments, and increased scrutiny from the tax authorities.
Georgia follows BEPS CbCR standards for multinational enterprises meeting global revenue thresholds.
Ultimate parent entities resident in Georgia may be required to file a CbC report summarizing global income, taxes paid, and economic activity.
Local entities of foreign MNE groups may need to submit notifications or secondary reports when the parent’s jurisdiction does not exchange CbCR data with Georgia.
CbCR requirements enhance risk assessment capabilities for the Georgian Revenue Service (GRS).
Documentation obligations require taxpayers to maintain clear, contemporaneous files supporting transfer pricing positions.
Georgian rules follow OECD-based standards, including functional analysis, comparability assessments, and method selection.
Failure to comply may result in TP adjustments, penalties, and increased scrutiny during tax audits.
Taxpayers must demonstrate that related-party transactions reflect arm’s length pricing and appropriate profit allocation.
Global implementation of the OECD’s Pillar 2 rules may affect large multinational groups operating in Georgia.
The potential introduction of a global minimum tax could influence structuring decisions and profit allocation for Georgian subsidiaries.
Georgia is monitoring international developments to align its tax framework with emerging global standards.
MNEs with Georgian operations should evaluate potential top-up tax exposures and compliance obligations under the Pillar 2 regime.
Transfer Pricing Methods
The Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method is preferred when reliable market comparables exist for goods, services, or financial transactions.
Georgian tax authorities rely heavily on CUP where external market prices are transparent and directly comparable.
CUP is commonly applied to commodity trading, financing transactions, and standardized intra-group services.
Adjustments may be required to reflect differences in contractual terms, economic conditions, or functional profiles.
The Resale Minus method is used when a Georgian distributor purchases goods from a related party and resells them to third parties without significant value addition.
The method determines the arm’s length price by subtracting an appropriate gross margin from the resale price.
Suitable for distribution businesses that perform limited-risk functions.
Authorities expect strong comparability analysis to justify the selected resale margin.
The Cost Plus method applies when a Georgian entity provides manufacturing, contract R&D, or intra-group services.
The arm’s length price is calculated by adding an appropriate mark-up to the supplier’s direct and indirect costs.
The Georgian Revenue Service (GRS) expects taxpayers to substantiate both the cost base and the selected mark-up.
Frequently used for support service centers, toll manufacturers, and shared service arrangements.
The Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) is widely used in Georgia due to the availability of financial comparables in regional databases.
TNMM evaluates profitability indicators such as operating margin, cost-plus mark-up, or return on assets.
Particularly suitable for routine distributors, manufacturers, and service providers.
Authorities require robust benchmarking and functional analysis to support margin selection.
The Profit Split method is applied where transactions between related parties are highly integrated and cannot be reliably evaluated separately.
Appropriate for cases involving unique intangibles, shared development activities, or joint value creation.
The method allocates combined profits based on each party’s contribution, functions, and risks.
Georgia follows OECD guidance when determining allocation keys and profit-splitting factors.
Analytical & Compliance Support
Georgian transfer pricing rules require a thorough comparability analysis covering characteristics of goods/services, contractual terms, economic conditions, functions performed, and risks assumed.
Taxpayers must compare controlled transactions with internal or external market data to establish appropriate arm’s length benchmarks.
The Georgian Revenue Service (GRS) expects the use of regional and international databases when reliable local comparables are limited.
Adjustments may be required to eliminate material differences and enhance the reliability of the selected comparable set.
A defensible comparability analysis is essential for supporting pricing outcomes and mitigating audit exposure.
A FAR (Functions, Assets, Risks) analysis is mandatory to identify the economic contributions of each party involved in a controlled transaction.
The analysis evaluates operational roles such as procurement, manufacturing, distribution, financing, and strategic decision-making.
Asset analysis focuses on tangible assets, intellectual property, and unique intangibles relevant to value creation.
Risk assessment covers market risk, credit risk, operational risk, inventory risk, and contractual responsibilities.
FAR findings guide the selection of the appropriate transfer pricing method and determine whether the Georgian entity is a routine or entrepreneurial role-player.
A robust FAR analysis strengthens audit defense and supports consistent Transfer Pricing documentation.
Trends, Challenges & Real-World Impacts
Limited availability of reliable local comparables makes benchmarking complex, pushing taxpayers to rely on regional or international datasets.
Rapid regulatory evolution creates uncertainty and increases the compliance burden for both multinational and domestic groups.
Georgian Revenue Service (GRS) audits have become more detailed, with heightened scrutiny on loss-making entities and routine service providers.
Determining appropriate pricing for intangible-related transactions remains difficult due to limited market data and evolving rules.
Small and medium enterprises often struggle with documentation expectations and lack in-house transfer pricing expertise.
Increasing alignment with OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines is shaping stricter documentation and comparability requirements.
Growing attention on digital business models and platform-based revenue structures.
More companies are adopting structured Transfer Pricing policies to anticipate GRS audits and reduce exposure.
Use of regional benchmarking (particularly Eastern Europe and CIS markets) is becoming standard practice.
A shift toward centralized global or regional TP frameworks is evident among large multinational groups operating in Georgia.
The GRS continues expanding audit coverage, especially for cross-border services, financing, and management-fee arrangements.
Recent guidance emphasizes the importance of economic substance testing for Georgian entities with limited local functions.
Several high-profile TP adjustments in sectors such as wholesale distribution, construction, and technology signal tighter enforcement.
Georgia is modernizing its TP administrative processes, including improved risk-assessment tools for audit selection.
Ongoing legislative updates reflect Georgia’s commitment to closer OECD integration.
Global economic volatility and supply chain disruptions have increased scrutiny of loss-making companies and unusual margin patterns in Georgia.
International tax reform—particularly Pillar 1 and Pillar 2—prompts multinational groups to re-evaluate transfer pricing models affecting their Georgian operations.
Digitalization of Georgia’s economy is driving authorities to assess value creation linked to data, technology, and platform-based services.
Rising interest rates and inflation levels have influenced intercompany financing terms, impacting loans, guarantees, and cash-pooling arrangements.
Geopolitical developments in the region are shaping compliance expectations, cross-border tax cooperation, and audit strategies.
Use Cases by Business Size & Industry
Startups in Georgia often operate with limited financial history, increasing the need for simplified and defensible transfer pricing models.
Authorities expect startups to justify losses or volatile profitability, especially when linked to related-party transactions.
Functional profiles for startups typically emphasize R&D, market development, and early-stage intangible creation—requiring clear documentation.
Georgia’s alignment with OECD Transfer Pricing principles means startups must demonstrate arm’s length pricing even during unprofitable phases.
Funding arrangements—especially shareholder loans—face scrutiny regarding interest rates, thin-capitalization risk, and economic substance.
SMEs face rising compliance expectations as Georgia strengthens its transfer pricing framework in line with global standards.
Documentation requirements apply to SMEs engaged in cross-border related-party transactions, regardless of company size.
SMEs must justify pricing for intercompany services, distribution activities, and procurement structures through comparability and FAR analysis.
Many SMEs lack internal TP expertise, making standardized benchmarking and clear methodologies critical for audit readiness.
Increased enforcement, including adjustments and penalties, means SMEs must maintain consistent, contemporaneous documentation supporting economic substance.
Dispute Resolution & Advance Agreements
Georgia allows taxpayers to seek binding Advance Pricing Agreements with the tax authority to reduce uncertainty around related-party transaction pricing.
APAs provide upfront clarity on acceptable transfer pricing methods, comparable sets, and key assumptions.
They are especially beneficial for businesses with complex transactions, intangible assets, or long-term intercompany contracts.
The APA process helps prevent future disputes by aligning expectations between taxpayers and the Georgian Revenue Service.
Companies must provide detailed documentation, financial data, and functional analyses to support their APA request.
Georgia emphasizes proactive compliance to reduce the likelihood of transfer pricing disputes and audit adjustments.
Maintaining contemporaneous documentation is essential to demonstrate arm’s length pricing during tax audits.
Taxpayers are encouraged to perform regular transfer pricing reviews, benchmarking, and FAR analyses to identify risk areas early.
Open communication with the tax authority and voluntary disclosures can reduce penalties and improve dispute outcomes.
Clear economic substance, defensible pricing structures, and transparent intercompany agreements are the core pillars of dispute avoidance in Georgia.
Clear, Competitive Packages Tailored for Your Transfer Pricing Needs
Basic Transfer Pricing Benchmarking
Standard Transfer Pricing Study
Premium Transfer Pricing Study
Experienced Transfer Pricing Advisors at Your Service
OECD Transfer Pricing-Country-Profile Georgia
This is general information only and not professional advice. Consult a professional before acting.