The shifting landscape of global taxation, fuelled by geopolitical tensions and new regulatory frameworks like BEPS 2.0, is forcing multinational treasury teams to rethink how they structure intercompany financing.
As countries adopt neo-mercantilist policies and increasingly scrutinise cross-border financial arrangements, companies must ensure their intercompany lending aligns with genuine economic substance and value creation.
LSEG, recently delved into how firms can manage transfer pricing and intercompany lending in a non-mercantilist landscape.
Over recent years, the post-pandemic world has seen a distinct move towards economic nationalism. Governments worldwide are introducing policies to reshore key industries, protect domestic tax bases, and tighten control over supply chains. These developments are significantly reshaping corporate tax planning, it said.
Tax authorities are now placing greater emphasis on the commercial justifications behind intercompany lending, particularly when transactions involve low-tax jurisdictions. In many cases, governments have begun imposing digital services taxes and minimum tax regimes unilaterally, often stepping outside traditional international tax frameworks. This patchwork approach risks double taxation for companies and adds to the complexity of managing intellectual property transfers across borders, a key factor in many transfer pricing models, LSEG explained.
Central to these changes is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) 2.0 framework, which fundamentally alters international tax rules.
BEPS 2.0’s Pillar One reallocates taxing rights to jurisdictions where customers are located, even if companies have no physical presence there, disrupting longstanding models that direct profits to IP-holding entities in low-tax regions. Pillar Two, meanwhile, introduces a global minimum corporate tax rate – effectively 15% – making it far more difficult for companies to benefit from profit shifting. Traditional treasury practices such as centralised financing hubs, cash pooling, IP holding structures, and captive insurance arrangements now require careful re-evaluation to ensure they remain viable in this new tax regime.
As global tax authorities increase their scrutiny, transfer pricing requirements have become increasingly complex. Regulators expect companies to produce comprehensive documentation that demonstrates the economic substance behind their treasury activities. This includes performing in-depth functional analyses, benchmarking interest rates against real market comparables, documenting capital allocation decisions, and evidencing risk management capabilities.
Companies are expected to use more sophisticated methodologies, incorporating credit rating models, loan duration analysis, collateral assessments, subordination structures, and adjustments for currency and local market risks.
In addition to corporate income tax, indirect taxes such as value-added tax (VAT) and withholding tax (WHT) play a critical role in determining the efficiency of cross-border funding.
To address these mounting challenges, corporate treasury and tax teams are advised to adopt several strategic approaches. First, financing structures should reflect genuine business activity and value creation rather than solely focusing on favourable tax rates.
Companies may need to reconsider centralised treasury models that, while efficient, expose them to regulatory and concentration risks. Instead, more decentralised structures aligned with operational footprints may prove more resilient. Establishing real commercial substance with appropriate staffing and governance in key jurisdictions is increasingly essential.
Robust documentation practices are also crucial, with contemporaneous records demonstrating the reasoning behind transfer pricing policies. Proactively modelling the impact of potential tax reforms allows organisations to adjust their structures before new rules take effect. Finally, engaging with policymakers through consultations can help businesses advocate for practical regulations that consider commercial realities.
Read the story here.
Keep up with all the latest FinTech news here
Copyright © 2025 FinTech Global
