Tax authorities often apply price or margin comparison methods without a deep consideration of the Taxpayer’s functional profile, which may differ significantly between domestic and export markets. This dispute centers on a VAT Export Base correction of IDR 5.49 billion, based on the assumption that export sales margins to affiliates should equal domestic margins to independent parties.
The conflict began when the Respondent applied the Cost Plus Method (CPM), comparing the gross margin of export sales to affiliates against the gross margin of domestic sales to independent third parties. The Respondent argued that export prices were too low. However, the Petitioner countered this by stating significant differences in the Functional, Asset, and Risk (FAR) profile; export sales were conducted under a contract manufacturing scheme with minimal risk, while local sales involved fully fledged manufacturing with substantial inventory and marketing risks.
The Board of Judges opined that the Respondent’s use of internal comparables (local sales) was inappropriate due to low comparability caused by material FAR differences. The Board accepted the Petitioner’s arguments using the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as documented in their Transfer Pricing Documentation (TP Doc). The analysis showed that the Petitioner’s profitability fell within the arm’s length interquartile range.
This analysis highlights that robust transfer pricing documentation and detailed functional analysis are crucial instruments in mitigating authority corrections. This decision confirms that product similarity does not automatically make transactions comparable if functions, assets, and risks are fundamentally different. Consequently, the Board of Judges cancelled all of the Respondent's corrections regarding the VAT Export Base.
A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here
tpc.consulting 
tpc.consulting 
info@taxindo.co.id