A royalty is one of the hardest Related Party payments to benchmark, because the thing being paid for - a brand, a patent, know-how, software - is rarely identical to anything traded between independent parties. That does not excuse a UAE company from testing the rate. It means the analysis has to work harder to show the payment reflects what an independent licensee would pay for the same rights.
Key official references include UAE Corporate Tax Law: Article 34 on the Arm's Length Principle, the UAE Federal Tax Authority Transfer Pricing Guide and the FTA Advance Pricing Agreements Guide. Related questions sit in IP DEMPE analysis, selecting reliable comparables and contract versus actual conduct.
Many UAE groups license a trademark, patent, technology or know-how from an overseas Related Party and pay a royalty calculated as a percentage of sales, profit or another agreed base. Because this is a Related Party or Connected Person payment, Article 34 of Federal Decree-Law No. 47 of 2022 requires the royalty to reflect the arm's length principle. Both the FTA's Corporate Tax Guide on Transfer Pricing and Chapter VI of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, on which the UAE approach to intangibles draws, set out how this is tested in practice. See FTA guidance on Related Parties and Article 35 and FTA guidance on Connected Persons and Article 36.
How should a UAE group start by identifying who owns the intangible?
Legal ownership of an intangible, on its own, does not determine who is entitled to the return it generates. The starting point is a DEMPE analysis - identifying which Related Party performs or controls the Development, Enhancement, Maintenance, Protection and Exploitation of the intangible, funds that activity, and has the financial capacity to bear the associated risk. A party that is the registered legal owner but contributes only funding, while another Related Party controls the underlying research, manages the risk and exploits the asset commercially, would typically be entitled only to a risk-adjusted return on its capital - not to the full residual profit generated by the intangible.
This matters for royalty benchmarking because it determines which side of the arrangement should be tested, and whether the royalty as structured even reflects the correct allocation of the value the intangible creates before a rate is benchmarked at all. An earlier overview of the same framework is in transfer pricing for intangibles: the DEMPE framework.
Which method fits a royalty?
| Method | When it is typically used |
|---|---|
| Comparable Uncontrolled Price / Comparable Uncontrolled Transaction (CUP/CUT) | Preferred where a sufficiently comparable licence of a similar intangible, on similar terms, between independent parties can be identified - either the licensee's or licensor's own dealings with unrelated parties (internal comparable), or third-party licence agreements drawn from commercial databases (external comparable). Intangibles are prone to being unique, so this method demands close scrutiny of whether the purported comparables really share similar profit potential. |
| Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) | Used to test the licensee's residual profitability after paying the royalty, benchmarked against independent companies performing comparable functions without the benefit (or burden) of a similar intangible - useful where a direct royalty rate comparable cannot be reliably found. |
| Profit Split Method (PSM) | Appropriate where both the licensor and the licensee make unique and valuable contributions, or where the parties are highly integrated such that a one-sided method cannot reliably capture the value each side brings - common where both sides have contributed to developing the underlying technology. |
See the FTA Transfer Pricing Methodologies FAQ. The FTA's wider corporate tax guidance can be reviewed through FTA Corporate Tax Guides and References.
What comparability factors make or break a royalty CUP?
Because two intangibles are rarely truly identical, the OECD Guidelines identify specific features that must be examined closely when selecting or adjusting royalty comparables:
-
Exclusivity - whether the licensee has exclusive rights that let it exclude competitors, or only a non-exclusive licence; exclusive rights typically carry more market power and a different rate.
-
Extent and duration of legal protection - a patent with ten years of protection left is not comparable in value to an otherwise similar patent expiring in a year.
-
Geographic scope - a global licence is generally more valuable than one limited to a single market, depending on the product and the market itself.
-
Useful life - some intangibles have a short commercial life due to the pace of technological change; others, particularly those underpinning ongoing R&D, retain value well beyond the current product generation.
-
Stage of development - a royalty agreed for a fully commercialised, proven product is not comparable to one agreed while the underlying technology is still unproven.
Where the compensation attributable to adjusting for these differences becomes a large share of the royalty itself, that is usually a sign the comparable is not close enough to support a reliable CUP, and a different method - or a different comparable - should be considered instead. See also when the FTA can reject comparables.
How does a profit split work for jointly developed IP?
Two Related Parties jointly develop a valuable technology - one holds the patent and sells the resulting product to third parties, the other manufactures under licence using the patented technology. Because both companies made unique intangible contributions and the group cannot find sufficiently comparable independent companies holding similar intangibles, a residual profit split is used instead of a simple royalty CUP.
For the overall UAE corporate tax context, see the FTA Corporate Tax portal.
The first step allocates each party a routine return for its baseline contribution - a contract-manufacturing mark-up for the manufacturing entity, and a distribution margin for the entity that sells to third parties - using independent contract manufacturer and wholesaler data with no unique intangibles of their own. The residual profit left over, after both routine returns are deducted from the group's combined operating profit, represents the value created by the jointly developed intangible itself. That residual is then split between the two parties on an economically valid basis, reflecting their relative contribution to developing the technology - for example using their relative development costs as the splitting factor. The royalty, or equivalent compensation, that emerges from this analysis is the arm's length outcome, rather than a rate picked from an unrelated survey of industry royalty ranges.
When should a Cost Contribution Arrangement mean there is no royalty at all?
Where Related Parties jointly fund and develop an intangible under a genuine Cost Contribution Arrangement (CCA), and each participant's contribution is proportionate to its share of the expected benefits, a participant that already holds rights to exploit the resulting intangible under the CCA should not also pay a separate royalty for using it - the CCA arrangement itself is the compensation mechanism. A royalty layered on top of a CCA contribution, without adjusting for it, risks double-counting the same value.
What documentation should a UAE royalty payer keep?
-
The licence agreement, including exclusivity, territory, duration, sub-licensing rights and the royalty base and rate.
-
A DEMPE analysis identifying which Related Party develops, enhances, maintains, protects and exploits the intangible, and who funds and bears the associated risk.
-
The method selected for benchmarking the rate, and the reasoning for choosing it over the alternatives.
-
Details of any comparable licences relied upon, including how exclusivity, legal protection, geographic scope, useful life and stage of development were assessed and adjusted for.
-
Where profit split is used, the routine-return calculation, the residual profit calculation, and the basis for the chosen splitting factor.
-
Evidence that the licensee's post-royalty profitability remains commercially sustainable and consistent with its own functional profile.
Where Ministerial Decision No. 97 of 2023 applies, this material belongs in the Local File.
Can a royalty rate be copied from a public industry survey?
Industry royalty rate surveys can be a useful starting point, but they rarely disclose enough detail about exclusivity, legal protection, scope or the licensee's specific circumstances to serve as a reliable standalone comparable without further adjustment or corroboration. FTA Corporate Tax Guides and Public Clarifications.
Does the legal owner of the IP always keep the profit from it?
No. Under a DEMPE analysis, a legal owner that only funds the intangible while another Related Party controls its development, risk and exploitation is generally entitled only to a return commensurate with the risk on its capital contribution, not the full return the intangible generates.
Should the royalty rate be reviewed if the licensee's sales grow significantly?
Yes. A rate that was arm's length at a smaller scale, or at an earlier stage of the intangible's commercial life, may no longer be supportable once circumstances change materially, so the benchmarking should be periodically refreshed.
The FTA also explains the arm's length principle in its FTA Transfer Pricing FAQ.
Is TNMM or a royalty CUP more common in practice?
A reliable royalty CUP is often difficult to find because intangibles tend to be unique. Where this is the case, testing the licensee's overall profitability through TNMM, or using a profit split where both parties contribute unique value, is frequently the more defensible approach.
How should a UAE finance team start with the facts rather than the tax result?
A strong transfer pricing position starts with the transaction itself. A finance team should first identify what was actually supplied, who performed the work, where the people and assets were located, which entity carried the commercial risk, and what the accounting records show. The tax result should come after that fact pattern is clear. This is especially important in the UAE because the arm's length analysis is not limited to the wording of an invoice. The commercial substance of the arrangement determines which comparability questions need to be answered.
For a UAE group, the practical exercise is usually to build a transaction inventory. List each related party and connected person, describe the transaction, identify the contractual terms, record the annual value, and note the pricing method currently used. Then compare that list with the general ledger, intercompany confirmations, contracts, and tax return disclosures. Differences between those records are often more important than a small difference in the final margin. They can show that the group has not consistently applied its own policy.
The FTA's Transfer Pricing Guide is useful as the starting reference because it explains the UAE framework, related party concepts, arm's length analysis and documentation expectations. A finance team should read the guide together with the Corporate Tax Law and the relevant implementing decisions rather than treating a summary article as the legal source. FTA Transfer Pricing Guide
Why does the functional analysis matter more than the label used in the agreement?
The label of a UAE entity does not determine its transfer pricing outcome. A company described as a distributor may in practice perform substantial marketing, inventory management, credit control and market development functions. Similarly, an entity called a service company may employ senior decision makers, own important assets or assume significant commercial risk. The functional analysis tests what the business actually does.
The documentation framework is set out by the Ministry of Finance in its Ministry of Finance transfer pricing documentation decision.
A useful functional analysis records functions, assets and risks separately. Functions include procurement, sales, manufacturing, logistics, marketing, treasury, management and technology support. Assets include tangible operating assets, working capital and relevant intangible assets. Risks include inventory, foreign exchange, credit, market, product and capacity risk. The analysis should identify who controls each economically significant risk and who has the financial capacity to bear it.
This approach also makes the benchmarking exercise more defensible. If the tested party is selected because it performs routine distribution functions, the comparable set should reflect businesses with similar functions and risk. If the facts show a more complex business, a routine TNMM analysis may need to be reconsidered. The OECD framework and the FTA guide both emphasise comparability and accurate delineation rather than relying on a label alone. FTA Transfer Pricing Methodologies FAQ
How can a UAE group make its transfer pricing evidence consistent with its accounting records?
A defensible file should tell the same story as the books. The intercompany agreement should describe the transaction in a way that is consistent with invoices, ledger accounts, payment flows and the actual conduct of the parties. If the agreement says that a UAE company provides management support but the ledger shows substantial royalty payments, the file should explain the distinction. If a policy says a distributor earns a routine margin but the accounts contain large year-end service charges, the reason should be documented.
The practical control is a transaction reconciliation. Start with the related party ledger and map each material account to the relevant agreement and transfer pricing policy. Reconcile the annual value to the disclosure position. Then check whether the pricing method and tested party in the study correspond to the transaction that was actually booked. This is a simple exercise, but it can identify problems before an FTA request.
The FTA documentation guidance is particularly useful here because documentation is not only a narrative exercise. The purpose is to enable the taxpayer to demonstrate how the arm's length outcome was reached. Good documentation therefore connects the facts, method, comparables, calculations and financial data.
What should management review before signing off the UAE transfer pricing position?
Management should be able to answer five practical questions. What related party transactions occurred? Why did the group choose the pricing method? What evidence supports the price or margin? Does the actual year-end result remain within the intended policy? And can the business reproduce the analysis if the FTA asks for it?
The detailed statutory requirements should be read with Ministerial Decision No. 97 of 2023.
A senior review should also consider changes during the year. A new shareholder, new financing arrangement, new distribution model, major acquisition, new intellectual property arrangement or change in business strategy can affect the comparability analysis. A study prepared at the beginning of the year does not automatically remain appropriate when the operating model changes.
For UAE groups with operations across several jurisdictions, management should also consider consistency between countries. The same transaction may be reviewed by two tax authorities. A position that is accepted in one country may create an adjustment elsewhere if the functional story is inconsistent. That is why the UAE file should be prepared as part of the group's wider transfer pricing governance rather than as a document created only for the UAE tax return.
How should a business prepare for an FTA transfer pricing review?
Preparation should focus on speed, consistency and evidence. The business should know where the current agreements, benchmarking study, transaction schedule, calculations and supporting invoices are stored. The people responsible for tax, finance and the relevant business function should also understand the commercial background well enough to explain the transaction without relying entirely on the adviser who prepared the report.
An audit-ready file normally includes the legal basis, organisational structure, transaction descriptions, functional analysis, selected method, comparability analysis, financial calculations and supporting documents. It should also contain a clear bridge from the tested party's statutory accounts to the financial information used in the benchmarking analysis. Where adjustments have been made, the file should explain why.
The FTA's published materials should be treated as the primary reference point. Where an issue is not answered clearly in a guide, the business should avoid creating a technical conclusion simply because a secondary source says it is common practice. The better approach is to identify the uncertainty, review the legislation and official guidance, and document the judgement applied.
Where the legal basis needs to be checked, refer to the UAE Corporate Tax Law.
How should a UAE benchmarking study explain the selection of comparables?
A good benchmarking study does not begin with a database screen and end with a percentile range. It explains why the selected companies are economically comparable to the tested party. The search strategy should be understandable to a reader who was not involved in preparing the study.
The analysis should explain the tested party, geographic market, industry, functions, assets and risks. It should state the financial period used, screening criteria, reasons for rejecting material candidates and any adjustments made. If the final set is small, the report should explain why. If the set is broad, it should explain why the differences do not undermine reliability.
This is particularly important when an FTA reviewer challenges a comparable. The strongest response is not that the company appeared in a commercial database. It is that the company satisfies the relevant comparability factors and that the differences have been assessed. The OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines provide the wider international framework for this comparability analysis.
What should a UAE company do when its actual margin is outside the benchmark range?
An outside-range result should trigger an investigation, not an automatic accounting entry. Management should first establish whether the actual result reflects genuine commercial conditions. A distributor may have earned a lower margin because freight costs increased, a new market was entered, inventory became obsolete or the company incurred one-off launch expenses. Those facts may explain the outcome, but they do not automatically prove that the transfer price was arm's length.
The next step is to compare the actual functions and risks with the tested party profile in the benchmarking study. If the business has changed, the study may no longer be reliable. If the business has not changed, management should analyse whether the deviation is temporary or structural. The conclusion should then be documented before any year-end true-up is considered.
For advance pricing agreement considerations, the FTA provides its FTA Advance Pricing Agreement Guide.
A year-end adjustment should be supported by the transfer pricing policy, contractual framework, accounting treatment and tax consequences. It should not be used merely to force the accounts into the middle of a statistical range.
What should be checked at year end before the UAE transfer pricing file is closed?
Year end is where the policy meets the actual numbers. The finance team should compare the agreed pricing mechanism with the recorded transactions and calculate the resulting margin or price. If the result differs materially from the policy expectation, the difference should be investigated before a true-up is booked.
The review should also consider whether the underlying business changed during the year. A new customer segment, supply chain change, new financing, acquisition or restructuring can affect comparability. A transfer pricing file that accurately described the business in January may not fully describe it in December.
The final review should be documented with a short management conclusion. That conclusion should explain whether the policy was applied, whether any adjustment was required and what evidence supports the decision.
How can the technical conclusion be kept practical for UAE management teams?
Transfer pricing is ultimately a business process. The tax department may own the technical analysis, but finance owns the numbers, legal owns many agreements, treasury owns financing, HR owns employee arrangements and business teams understand the commercial reality. A useful UAE policy connects those functions instead of leaving transfer pricing as an isolated annual report.
The FTA's general corporate tax guidance is available in the FTA Corporate Tax General Guide.
For management, the most useful output is a short dashboard showing related party transactions, material movements, current benchmark status, disclosure position, documentation readiness and open technical questions. The detailed report remains important, but the dashboard helps management act before a compliance deadline.
This practical approach also improves the quality of future benchmarking. Each year the group already has a reliable transaction inventory and evidence trail, so the adviser spends more time on technical analysis and less time reconstructing the facts.
What questions is a UAE tax reviewer likely to ask first?
The first questions are usually factual. What is the transaction? Who are the parties? What does each party actually do? Why was the price set this way? What evidence supports the price? How was the tested party selected? Which comparables were considered? How does the result reconcile to the accounts?
A taxpayer should be able to answer these questions consistently across its agreement, TP report, tax return and financial statements. If different documents tell different stories, the reviewer may spend more time testing the transaction.
Preparing these answers in advance is one of the simplest ways to improve the quality of a transfer pricing position. It also forces the business to identify gaps while there is still time to fix them.
For current implementing legislation and FTA decisions, consult the FTA Corporate Tax legislation page.
Official government and international references
For the domestic legal framework, refer to UAE Corporate Tax, Ministry of Finance. FTA FAQ on Domestic and Cross-Border Transfer Pricing
The main FTA guidance is available in FTA Transfer Pricing Guide.
The FTA also maintains current references in FTA Corporate Tax Guides and Public Clarifications.
The FTA explains the core concept in its FTA Transfer Pricing FAQ.
For documentation questions, see FTA Transfer Pricing Documentation FAQ.
The Ministry of Finance explains the documentation framework in Ministry of Finance Transfer Pricing Documentation Decision.
For the international arm's length framework, see OECD Transfer Pricing topic.
For the detailed OECD methodology, see OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines 2022.
A practical action plan for UAE groups
-
Map all related parties, connected persons and transaction categories against the legal entity structure and general ledger.
-
Document the commercial facts, including functions, assets, risks, contractual terms and actual conduct.
-
Select and document the most appropriate transfer pricing method and explain why the method fits the transaction.
-
Test the pricing or margin against reliable comparable evidence and record the reasons for accepting or rejecting material comparables. OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines
-
Reconcile the final transfer pricing result to the statutory accounts, intercompany invoices and Corporate Tax return data.
-
Complete the relevant disclosure and documentation checks before the filing process is closed, and retain supporting evidence in an accessible audit file.
Frequently asked questions
Can a royalty rate be copied from a public industry survey?
Industry royalty rate surveys can be a useful starting point, but they rarely disclose enough detail about exclusivity, legal protection, scope or the licensee's specific circumstances to serve as a reliable standalone comparable without further adjustment or corroboration.
Does the legal owner of the IP always keep the profit from it?
No. Under a DEMPE analysis, a legal owner that only funds the intangible while another Related Party controls its development, risk and exploitation is generally entitled only to a return commensurate with the risk on its capital contribution, not the full return the intangible generates.
Should the royalty rate be reviewed if the licensee's sales grow significantly?
Yes. A rate that was arm's length at a smaller scale, or at an earlier stage of the intangible's commercial life, may no longer be supportable once circumstances change materially, so the benchmarking should be periodically refreshed.
Is TNMM or a royalty CUP more common in practice?
A reliable royalty CUP is often difficult to find because intangibles tend to be unique. Where this is the case, testing the licensee's overall profitability through TNMM, or using a profit split where both parties contribute unique value, is frequently the more defensible approach.
When should there be no royalty at all under a Cost Contribution Arrangement?
Where Related Parties jointly fund and develop an intangible under a genuine CCA, and each participant's contribution is proportionate to its share of the expected benefits, a participant that already holds rights to exploit the resulting intangible under the CCA should not also pay a separate royalty for using it.
Does the UAE arm's length principle apply to domestic related party transactions?
Yes. The UAE framework applies to relevant related party and connected person transactions regardless of whether the counterparty is in the UAE or outside the UAE, subject to the applicable rules and definitions.
When should a UAE business refresh its transfer pricing analysis?
The analysis should be reviewed when the business, transaction, functions, assets or risks change materially. Comparable financial data should also be kept current in line with the taxpayer's benchmarking approach.
What evidence should be retained for an FTA review?
Retain agreements, invoices, transaction schedules, functional analysis, benchmarking support, calculations, allocation keys, approvals and the evidence used to reconcile the TP result to the accounts.
Is a benchmarking report enough to support an arm's length position?
Not by itself. The report should explain the transaction, functional profile, method selection, comparable selection, financial calculations and the link between the tested result and the accounting records.
Can the actual year end result differ from the transfer pricing policy?
Yes, but the difference should be investigated and documented. A year end true up should be supported by the commercial facts, policy, contractual framework and applicable tax and accounting treatment.
How should management respond when the transaction facts change during the year?
The change should be documented promptly. A new financing arrangement, acquisition, restructuring, new service, change in functions or major market change can affect the existing analysis and should trigger a review.
Which official sources should a UAE taxpayer check before relying on transfer pricing guidance?
Start with the official Ministry of Finance and Federal Tax Authority materials in the UAE. For international methodology, the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines are the main reference. For Saudi matters, use ZATCA's published regulations and guidance.
Primary sources and further reading
-
UAE Corporate Tax Law: Article 34 on the Arm's Length Principle
-
Ministerial Decision No. 97 of 2023 on Transfer Pricing Documentation
How SBC Tax Consulting can help
SBC's transfer pricing team maps DEMPE functions, tests royalty CUPs, TNMM and profit-split outcomes, and documents the licence for the Local File. International tax specialists then look at the same IP chain across jurisdictions. Contact SBC before the next intra-group licence, royalty true-up or IP migration.
This publication is for general information only and does not constitute professional advice. Please consult your SBC advisor before acting on any matter covered here.