U.S. 26 CFR 1.482-5(b)(4)(i-ii) claim that the “return on capital employed” (return on assets) is less sensitive to “functional differences” than the operating profit margin or the operating profit markup. This claim is based on the unrealistic premise that “capital flows” to equalize profit rates (return on assets) among companies in the same (or in different) industries by some "invisible hand."

Topics: Return on Assets TNMM/CPM Profit Indicators

Determining arm's length remuneration for a Czech manufacturing affiliate under different transfer pricing models.

Topics: Return on Assets Contract Manufacturer Royalty Rates Tax Controversy TNMM/CPM

There are often legitimate concerns with using book value versus market value of assets in applying a Return on Assets approach in transfer pricing. While employing a Return on Costs approach may be a reliable alternative, it must also account for comparability differences in asset intensity.

Topics: Financial Economics Benchmarking CAPM Asset Intensity Adjustment Return on Assets Contract Manufacturer

Dr. Ednaldo Silva illustrates why asset intensity adjustments to the Return on Assets profit indicator are redundant and unviable.

Topics: Asset Intensity Adjustment Return on Assets Profit Indicators

Notwithstanding its acceptance in Coca Cola Co. v. Commissioner of the IRS, Return on Assets is a controversial profit indicator to use in transfer pricing. At the very least it must be subject to economic analysis to corroborate a relationship between operating profit and operating assets.

Topics: Tutorial Return on Assets Tax Controversy Profit Indicators