Transfer Pricing and Multinational Management Control Systems
Management Control Systems
Management control systems are a means of gathering and using information to aid
and coordinate the planning and control decisions throughout an organization and to
guide the behaviour of its managers and other employees.
Many MCS contain some or all of the balanced scorecard perspectives, integrating
financial and non-financial information.
Well-designed MCS use information from both with-in the company (ie. net income
and employee satisfaction) and outside the company (ie. stock price and customer
satisfaction).
Consist of formal and informal control systems:
o Formal systems include explicit rules, procedures, performance measures, and
incentive plans that guide the behaviour of its managers and other employees.
o Informal systems include shared values, loyalties, and mutual commitments
among members of the company, corporate culture, and unwritten norms about
acceptable behaviour.
Evaluation Management Control Systems
To be effective, management control systems should be closely aligned to the firm’s
strategies and goals.
Systems should be designed to fit the company’s structure and decision-making
responsibility of individual managers.
Effective management control systems should also motivate managers and their
employees.
Motivation is the desire to attain a selected goal (goal-congruence) combined with the
resulting pursuit of that goal (effort).
Two Aspects of Motivation
Goal congruence exists when individuals and groups work toward achieving the
organization’s goals—managers working in their own best interest take actions that
align with the overall goals of top management.
Effort is exertions toward reaching a goal, including both physical and mental actions.
Organization Structure and Decentralization
Decentralization is the freedom for managers at lower levels of the organization to
make decisions.
Autonomy is the degree of freedom to make decisions. The greater the freedom, the
greater the autonomy.
Decentralization vs. Centralization
Total decentralization means minimum constraints and maximum freedom for
managers at the lowest levels of an organization to make decisions.
Total centralization means maximum constraints and minimum freedom for managers
at the lowest levels of an organization to make decisions.
Companies’ structures generally fall somewhere in between these two extremes, as
each has benefits and costs.
Benefits of Decentralization
Creates greater responsiveness to subunit’s customers, suppliers, and employees
Leads to gains from faster decision making
Increases motivation of subunit managers
Assists management development and learning
Sharpens the focus of subunit managers
Cost of Decentralization
1. Leads to suboptimal decision making, which arises when a decision’s benefit to one
subunit is more than offset by the costs or loss of benefits to the organization as a whole.
o Also called incongruent decision making or dysfunctional decision making
2. Focuses manager’s attention on the subunit rather than the company as a whole.
3. Results in duplication of output if subunits provide similar products or services.
Decentralization in Multinational Companies
Multinational firms are often decentralized because centralized control of a company
with subunits around the world is often physically and practically impossible.
Decentralization enables managers in different countries to make decisions that exploit
their knowledge of local business and political conditions and to deal with
uncertainties in their individual environments.
Biggest drawback is loss or lack of control.
Decision About Responsibility Centers
Regardless of the degree of decentralization, MCS use one or a mix of the four types of
responsibility centers:
o Cost center, Revenue center, Profit center and Investment center
Profit centres can be highly centralized
o managers have little leeway in making decisions
Cost centers can be highly decentralized
o Managers may have great latitude on capital expenditures and where to purchase
materials or services
Transfer Pricing
Transfer price—the price one subunit (department or division) charges for a product or
service supplied to another subunit of the same organization.
MCS use transfer prices to coordinate the actions of subunits and to evaluate their
performance.
The transfer price creates revenues for the selling subunit and purchase costs for the
buying subunit affecting each subunit’s operating income.
Intermediate product—the unfinished product or service transferred between
subunits of an organization.
o Production stages may be in separate subunits of the organization, that may be
geographically apart
o Product may be processed further by the transferee or sold directly to an external
customer
Alternative Transfer Pricing Methods
1. Market-based transfer prices
2. Cost-based transfer prices
3. Negotiated transfer prices
Criteria for Evaluating Transfer Prices
In all MCS, transfer prices should help achieve a company’s strategies and goals and
fit its organizational structure.
Transfer pricing should:
1. Promote goal congruence
2. Induce managers to exert a high level of effort
3. Help top management evaluate performance of individual subunits
4. Preserve a high degree of subunit autonomy in decision making
Transfer Pricing – Illustration
Inter-Provincial Transfers and Taxes
Provincial governments prefer transfer prices at market price as it is an arm’s-length
price
Split of taxable income between provinces impacts both operating cash flow and net
income
Advance transfer price arrangement (APA), can be negotiated with tax authorities in
advance
o Avoids costly and time-consuming disputes with tax authorities
Market-Based Transfer Prices
Top management chooses to use the price of similar product or service that is
publicly available.
Optimal decision-making under 3 conditions:
1. Intermediate market is perfectly competitive.
2. Interdependencies of subunits are minimal.
3. No additional costs or benefits to the company as a whole from buying or
selling in the external market instead of transacting internally.
A perfectly competitive market exists when there is a homogeneous product with
buying prices equal to selling prices and no individual buyer or seller can affect those
prices by their own actions.
Allows a firm to achieve goal congruence, motivating management effort, subunit
performance evaluations, and subunit autonomy.
Perhaps should not be used if the market is currently in a state of “distress pricing.”
Distress prices:
o “Temporary” price declines due to excess supply
o In the short term, supplier division should meet the distress price as long as it
exceeds incremental costs
o In the long term, supplier division should stop producing
Cost-Based Transfer Prices
Top management chooses a transfer price based on the costs of producing the
intermediate product. Examples include:
o Variable production costs
o Variable and fixed production costs
o Full costs (including life-cycle costs)
o One of the above, plus some markup
Useful when market prices are unavailable, inappropriate, or too costly to obtain.
Full-cost bases
o Many companies use transfer prices based on full costs that contain an allocation
of fixed overhead
o Can lead to suboptimal decisions in decentralized companies
o Full-cost based on ABC cost drivers can provide more refined allocation bases
Variable cost bases
o Can lead to divisions recording large losses and income due to transfer pricing
Hybrid Transfer Pricing
Takes into account both cost and market information.
Types of hybrid transfer prices:
o Prorating the difference between maximum and minimum transfer prices
o Dual pricing
o Negotiated pricing
Prorating the difference between the maximum and minimum cost-based transfer
prices.
Dual-pricing—using two separate transfer-pricing methods to price each transfer
from one subunit to another. Example: selling division receives full cost pricing, and the
buying division pays market pricing.
o Difference in pricing is absorbed by corporate office rather than operating
units
o Promotes goal congruence
o Not widely used in practice
Negotiated Transfer Prices
Occasionally, subunits of a firm are free to negotiate the transfer price between
themselves and then to decide whether to buy and sell internally or deal with external
parties.
May or may not bear any resemblance to cost or market data.
Often used when market prices are volatile.
Represent the outcome of a bargaining process between the selling and buying subunits.
Comparison of Transfer-Pricing Methods
Minimum Transfer Price Guideline
The minimum transfer price in many situations should be:
o Minimum Transfer Price = Incremental costs per unit incurred up to the point of
transfer + Opportunity costs per unit to the supplying division
Incremental cost - the additional cost of producing and transferring the product/service.
Opportunity cost - the maximum contribution margin forgone by the selling subunit if
the product/service is transferred internally.
Multinational Transfer Pricing and Tax Considerations
Transfer prices across borders have tax implications.
o Tax factors include income taxes, payroll taxes, customs duties, tariffs, sales
taxes, valuea-added taxes, environment-related taxes, other government levies,
etc.
Establishing an arm’s-length price for value-added services such as marketing and
intangibles is difficult
Income Tax Act of Canada (section 247) limits transfer pricing to 5 methods
Setting Transfer Prices: 5 Methods
Traditional transaction methods:
1. Comparable uncontrolled price – internal market- based price
2. Resale price method – the calculated arm’s-length resale price
3. Cost-plus method
Transactional profit methods:
4. Profit split method
5. Transactional net margin method
Tax Minimization Strategies
Establish a legitimate subsidiary in a tax haven
o Have no tax treaties with Canada
Establish a legitimate subsidiary in an international financial centre with very low tax
rates
o Have tax treaties with Canada
Request an advance pricing arrangement with all involved tax authorities