PwC's Managing upstream risk: Regulatory reform review - An asian perspective August 2013 | Page 17
Table 2: OECD’s peer reviews on information exchange
Jurisdiction
India
Phase
2
Summary of review
• EOI practice is in line with the international standard for transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. • Has in place appropriate organisational processes and resources to ensure effective exchange of information and greatly improved the timeliness of responses during 2011 and 2012.
Luxembourg
2
• Not fully in line with the international standard. • Luxembourg has not used its information gathering and enforcement powers to obtain requested information in all instances.
Malta
2
• EOI practice is in line with the international standard for transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. • As new legislation establishing comprehensive requirements on the availability of ownership and accounting information has been recently introduced, Malta should monitor its practical implementation.
Monaco
2
• EOI practice is in line with the international standard for transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. • Should nevertheless introduce exceptions to the prior notification process for requests received from jurisdictions other than France (with which it has longestablished EOI arrangements).
Qatar
2
• Has very limited experience in exchanging information for tax purposes. • Should monitor its EOI practices, in particular taking account of any significant changes to the volume of incoming EOI requests.
San Marino
2
• Has generally implemented the standard of transparency and exchange of information but should monitor the application of enforcement measures. • San Marino has made much effort to fully cooperate in tax matters and has signed EOI agreements with 44 jurisdictions, including its major partners. As the number of requests may increase in the coming years, San Marino should monitor its processes and resources.
The Bahamas
2
• Although The Bahamas started receiving requests for information relatively recently, the authorities were often able to provide the information and responded fully to 75% of the requests within 180 days. • Whilst ownership and accounting information was generally made available, the lack of monitoring of ownership and accounting obligations may affect the availability of information for all legal entities.
Virgin Islands (British)
Virgin Islands (British)
2
• Experienced some difficulties obtaining and exchanging information for tax purposes during the three-year review period from 1 July 2009 – 30 June 2012. • Its exchange of information partners indicated that in a significant proportion of cases the responses to EOI requests were incomplete. • No clear organisational process was in place, resulting in the Virgin Islands not using its access powers effectively. In particular accounting information was not obtained or exchanged in many cases.
Banking | Regulatory Reform Review
17