In our course, we offer a more detailed description of these requirements. We reiterate that the content of the intercompany contract should be consistent with the three principles discussed above. Other common errors are overly complex agreements without reconciling ownership and operation of intellectual property, not adequately reflecting group structures, failing to guard against inappropriate termination provisions, and neglecting the importance of making arrangements for the distribution of costs among multiple recipients of services. The terms of the intercompany agreements must be consistent with the legal and economic ownership of the relevant assets and the commercial reality of intragroup transactions. For example, an intragroup agreement in which a company claims to grant an intellectual property license that it does not actually have can create confusion and misleading accounting entries, rather than promoting transfer pricing and other business objectives of the group. How do you eliminate the markup in the inventory receipt organization if you don`t know if it`s still inv or COGS? Don`t inventory towers have a place in this provision? It is important to ensure that intercompany agreements respect reality, comply with transfer pricing documentation and comply with market standards. Please specify the table names that store this basic data for incomplete or inprocess intercompany transactions, so that we can prepare queries and include the data to release 12 interface tables via the 11i to R12 DB link. As in many tax areas, transfer pricing is closely linked to the legal structures and contractual terms in which intra-group transactions are conducted. This is what the OECD recently highlighted in the latest edition of its transfer pricing guidelines. The 2017 edition once again underlines the fundamental importance of legal analysis and intercompany agreements in resolving transfer pricing issues. It is worth quoting verbatim what is set out in the guidelines for 2017: “It is important that ex ante risk-taking of the contract provides clear evidence of the obligation to take risks before the risk results occur. This evidence is a very important part of the tax administration`s analysis of risk transfer pricing in commercial or financial relationships, since in practice an audit by the tax administration may take place years in advance after the decision of the related companies and, if the results are known, intracompany compensation is activated and an intrcompany clearing rule has been established by “others”.