application of transfer pricing as a strategic tool by multinational corporations...

50
i APPLICATION OF TRANSFER PRICING AS A STRATEGIC TOOL BY MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS IN KENYA BY: JOHN NJOGU A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION SCHOOL OF BUSINESS UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI OCTOBER 2013

Upload: buique

Post on 01-Sep-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

i

APPLICATION OF TRANSFER PRICING AS A STRATEGIC

TOOL BY MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS IN KENYA

BY:

JOHN NJOGU

A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL

FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD

OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF BUSINESS

ADMINISTRATION

SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

OCTOBER 2013

ii

DECLARATION

This research project is my original work and has not been submitted for a degree in

any other university.

Signature: _______________________ Date: ___________

John Njogu

D61/63494/2010

This research project has been submitted for examination with my approval as

University of Nairobi supervisor.

Signature ___________________ Date: ________________

Supervisor

Prof. Peter K’Obonyo

School of Business

University of Nairobi

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank God for the gift of life and health and for seeing me to this point

of completion of my final project. I would like to sincerely thank my family and

especially my parents for their support and encouragement throughout my school life

and during this programme and I wish to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my

supervisor, Prof. Peter K’Obonyo, for his support and guidance throughout this project.

iv

DEDICATION

This research project is dedicated to my loving parents whose foresight in education

and constant encouragement drove me to this level of education; and to my brother

James and my work colleagues as well for being a constant source of inspiration thus

far.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION………………………………………………………….…................ II

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………..……………….. ............ III

DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………........... IV LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS………………………………………..……. .............. VII

LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………… ......... VIII

LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………….... .......... XI

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………...…. . … .............. X

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION…………………………………..….. ................ 1 1.1 Background to the study…………….…………………………………... ................ 1

1.1.1 The concept of strategy……………………….……………....……..… .............. 2

1.1.2 Transfer pricing……………………………….………….……...….…. .............. 2

1.1.3 Multinational companies in Kenya………….………………………... ............... 3

1.2 Research problem………………………………………………...…………............ 4

1.3 Conceptual motivation…………………………………………...….…..…. ............ 5

1.4 Research objectives…………………………………………………......….. ............ 6

1.5 Value of the study……………………………………………………..…… ............ 6

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………...... ............. 7 2.1 Introduction………………………..…………………………….………..... ............ 7

2.2 Strategic tool concept………………………..………………….………..... ............ 7

2.3 Transfer pricing theories……………………………..……………….……. ............ 8

2.3.1 Economic theory…………………………………….……………........ ............. 8

2.3.2 Mathematical programming……………………….…………….……. .............. 9 2.3.3 Accounting theory……………………….………….………….…….. ............... 9

2.3.4 Organisation behavior theory………………………………….…… ................ 10

2.3.5 Strategic management theory………………….……………………. ............... 10

2.4 Application of transfer pricing as a capital and profit allocation…….................... 11

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY………………..…. ............. 13 3.1 Introduction……………………………………….…………….………... ............. 13 3.2 Research design…………………………………….………….…………. ............ 13

3.3 Population of the study………………………………….……….……….. ............ 13 3.4 Sampling………………………………………………….…….………… ............ 13

3.5 Data collection…………………………………………….….………...… ............ 14 3.6 Data analysis………………..…………………………………..………… ............ 14

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. .............. 15 4.1 Introduction………………………………………..…………….………... ............ 15 4.2 General information……………………………...….………….…………. ........... 16

4.2.1 Department or area of expertise…………………..….……….……….. ........... 16 4.2.2 Position in the organization…………………………...…….………… ........... 17

4.2.3 Years of service with the company…………………….….………...… ........... 17 4.3 Corporate strategy…..…………………………………..………….……… ........... 18 4.3.1 Understanding of corporate strategy………….…………..….………... ........... 18 4.3.2 Strategy formulation process……………………………….…………. ........... 19 4.3.3 Department involvement in strategy formulation…………….……….. ........... 20

4.3.4 Role of parent company in strategy formulation………….……...…… ........... 20 4.3.5 Corporate objectives……………………….….……….…………....… ........... 21 4.4 Transfer pricing…..…………………………………..…………………… ............ 22 4.4.1 Understading of transfer pricing………………………..….……….…. ........... 22 4.4.2 Formulation of transfer pricing and objectives there on……….….….. ............ 22

vi

4.4.3 Application of transfer pricing as a strategy……………….……….… ............ 24

4.4.4 Transfer pricing and levels of sales and profits achieved……..…….… ........... 25 4.4.5 Transfer pricing as a measure of performance…………….…….….… ............ 26 4.4.6 Transfer pricing and level of intercompany transactions……..…….… ............ 26

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………….……. ............. 28 3.1 Introduction……………………………………….…………….….……... ............ 28 3.2 Summary…………………………………………….………….…………. ........... 28 3.3 Conclusions………………………………….……………..…….………. ............ .29

3.4 Limitations of the study…………………………………..…….………… ............ 30 3.5 Recommendations for further research…………….…………….………...… ....... 30

RFERENCIES………………………………………………………………… ............ 31

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………… ............ 35

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF COMPANIES……………………………………………35

APPENDIX 2: QUESTIONAIRE……………………………………………...….37

vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

MNCs: Multinational Companies

ITA: Income Tax Act

KRA: Kenya Revenue Authority

MNE: Multinational Enterprises

OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

TP: Transfer Pricing

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Response rate................................................................................................ 15

Table 4.2 Application of transfer pricing as a strategy analysis................................... 25

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1: Respondents background or area of expertise............................................ 16

Figure 4.2: Respondents positions in the organization................................................. 17

Figure 4.3: Respondents years of service..................................................................... 18

Figure 4.4: Corporate strategy...................................................................................... 18

Figure 4.5: Corporate strategy formulation.................................................................. 19

Figure 4.6: Department involvement in strategy formulation...................................... 20

Figure 4.7: Role of parent company in strategy formulation....................................... 21

Figure 4.8: Corporate objectives................................................................................. 21

Figure 4.9: Understanding of transfer pricing.............................................................. 22

Figure 4.10: Formulation of transfer pricing and objectives there on.......................... 23

Figure 4.11: Application of transfer pricing as a strategy............................................ 24

Figure 4.12: Transfer pricing and level of sales and profits achieved.......................... 26

Figure 4.13: Transfer pricing as a measure of performance......................................... 26

Figure 4.14: Transfer pricing and level of intercompany transactions......................... 27

x

ABSTRACT

Transfer pricing has been viewed for many years as a compliance issue whereby MNCs

are legally required to prepare, document and file with tax revenue authorities.

Additionally, most authors have written on economics, accounting, taxation and

finance aspect of transfer pricing. Notable among them are Eccles (1985) and

Hirshleifer (1985). However, of late, transfer pricing has been viewed as a strategic tool

that can enable MNCs to gain competitive advantage. Additionally, there is little

literature on transfer pricing and strategy. The objective of the study was to find out

how MNCs operating in Kenya were applying transfer pricing as a strategic tool. The

study adopted descriptive research design which enabled to describe characteristics

associated with the subject population. It was found out that transfer pricing was

applied to achieve internal objectives such as motivating subsidiary managers,

monitoring performance of foreign subsidiaries and as a means of achieving goal

harmonization between subsidiary managers and parent companies. External objectives

included application of transfer pricing as a means of minimizing taxes and duties, as a

means of controlling foreign exchange risks, as a cash management tool and as a means

of avoidance of foreign government interference. It was revealed that in contrast to a

purely finance, economics and tax driven mechanism, transfer pricing can be

considered as a tool for advancing MNCs strategies in Kenya. Results indicated that

executives were not solely focused on compliance, finance, economics and taxation

issues as primary objectives of transfer pricing. It was recommended that future

researchers should focus on examining various ways of managing transfer pricing risks

and challenges especially in emerging markets.

1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

With the pursuit of profits, cash flows, economics of scale and competitive

advantages most companies have chosen the route of globalization. According to

World Investment Report (2008) that there are approximately 79,000 multinational

enterprises (MNEs), with an average of 10 foreign affiliates each. Further, up to two

thirds of the world trade is taking place between related parties, including shipments

and transfers from parent companies to affiliates as well as trade between alliance

partners (Eden, 1998).

Globalization is the process by which businesses develop worldwide brands and

products which they supply across the world, and in which they employ labour in

many different countries. No country today can provide all of the resources necessary

to fully develop its economic potential and satisfy the needs of its population.

International trade has enabled countries to gain from the advantages of specialization

by exchanging its surplus goods for surpluses produced by other countries. Thus its

inhabitants can prosper from lower prices and higher living standards (Cole, 1996). In

order to enjoy the benefits of international expansion MNCs are expected to come up

with sound business strategies which enable them to fit in the environment whereby

they are able to overcome challenges presented by the global markets such costs

containment and pricing regulations and at the same time take advantage of

opportunities created by such markets including un-met demand and un-explored

markets. Without a clear strategy MNCs may never succeed in global markets

(Martinson, Englebrecht, & Mitchell, C, 1999).

Transfer pricing is one of the most important strategic activities involved in the

management of multiple business units within the firm. According to (Czinkota and

Ronkainen, 2007) a successful transfer pricing is a key element in the marketing mix

since it involves pricing of sales to members of the corporate family as well as pricing

within the individual markets in which the companies operates. A properly designed

transfer pricing strategy will enable management to make decisions congruent with

the firm‟s goals. It will also help a company achieve its corporate-wide goals

(Martinson, Englebrecht and Mitchell, 1999).

2

1.1.1 The concept of strategy

Johnson and Scholes (2003) have defined strategy as the direction and scope of an

organisation over the long-term which achieves advantage for the organisation

through its configuration of resources within a challenging environment, to meet the

needs of markets and to fulfil stakeholder expectations. Business Dictionary, (2011)

has defined strategy as a long-term plan that is devised to help a company to gain a

competitive advantage over its rivals. Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness at

Harvard School of Business website has defined strategy as to how a company

competes in a particular business. It is concerned with how a company can gain a

competitive advantage through a distinctive way of competing.

A strategy is therefore a plan of action designed to achieve set and desired goals. It is

concerned with gaining (or being prepared to gain) a position of advantage over

adversaries or best exploiting emerging possibilities. As there is always an element of

uncertainty about future, strategy is more about a set of options normally referred to

as strategic choices than a fixed plan (Porter, 1980). For example, most MNCs have a

business objective of increasing growth and profitability in various countries by a

given percentage and achieve given percentage in overall growth and profitability.

1.1.2 Transfer pricing

Transfer pricing refers to pricing arrangement between related business enterprises

and applies to intra-company dealings such as sales or purchase of goods, provision

of services, sale or transfer of tangible and intangible assets, borrowing and lending

of money and any other transaction which may affect profit and loss. Transfer pricing

is concerned with pricing of intra-company trade. (Tang, 1997). According to

Abdallah (2004) a transfer price is defined as the price at which a business entity

transfers goods, intangible assets, or provide services to a related entity, such as a

parent company to a related entity, such as a subsidiary. The price is usually set and

used by an MNC to quantify the goods transferred or value the service rendered from

one subsidiary domiciled in a specific country to a subsidiary located in another

country.

Ordinarily, when independent enterprises are trading, prices of goods and services

provided as well as other commercial dealings are determined by market forces. On

3

the other hand when trading is between related companies, commercial and financial

relations may not be directly affected by market forces. According to (Azemar and

Corcos, 2009) cross country differences in corporate income tax rates lead to MNC to

find strategies of reducing their tax liability through manipulation of transfer prices.

Manipulation of transfer pricing may occur by setting transfer price above or below

opportunity cost. This in turn shifts MNC profits from high-taxation jurisdiction to

low-taxation jurisdiction there by helping them to reduce overall tax payment and

increase after tax global profit. Multinational companies are required to come up with

cost estimates for performance and measurement purposes. This is done by allocating

costs and overheads to various functions and units of business. For affiliated MNC,

allocation mechanisms are highly subjective since they have considerable discretion

in allocating them to particular products/ services and geographical jurisdiction. Such

discretion can enable them to minimize taxes and there by swell profits by ensuring

that most profits are located in low tax jurisdiction (Ralph. and Reimers, 2009)

World over, tax revenue authorities have insisted on taxing a fair share of income of

MNC from their jurisdictions but where profits have been shifted to other

jurisdictions there may be no profits to tax. It is against this backdrop that tax revenue

authorities have always treated intercompany transactions with suspicion. Related

party transactions may be viewed by tax revenue authorities as efforts to manipulate

profits subject to tax (Freinschreiber and Kent, 2008). To avoid transfer pricing being

out of line with market rates tax revenue authorities have required MNC to set,

analyse, document and adjust charges between related parties to justify arm‟s-length

principal in their dealings (The Organization Economic Cooperation Development

Council Transfer Pricing Guidelines [OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines], 2010).

1.1.3 Multinational corporations in Kenya

Business Dictionary, (2011) has defined MNC as an enterprise that has set its

operations in more than one country. It may have headquarters in one country (home

country) and subsidiaries in other countries. According to Investopedia Dictionary,

(2011) MNC refer to corporations that have facilities and assets in at least one

country other than home country. Porter (1980) has also defined MNC as a firm that

owns business operations in more than one country.

4

According to Business Dictionary, (2011) there are four categories of MNC namely:

decentralized corporation with strong home country presence;

a global, centralized corporation that acquires cost advantage through

centralized production wherever cheaper resources are available; an international

company that builds on the parent corporation's technology or R&D, or a

transnational enterprise that combines the previous three approaches.

From a Kenyan perspective, MNCs can be classified in to large and medium

enterprises. Large enterprises include East Africa Breweries, James Finlay Ltd,

Unilever Kenya Ltd, Total Kenya Ltd among others and medium enterprises include

Schenker Limited, Ludin Kenya Ltd, Tarpo Industries East Africa, Beauty Line Ltd

and Westcon Africa among others. Further, MNCs in Kenya can also be classified

into inward and outward MNCs. Inward MNCs are foreign companies that have set

business operations in Kenya such as Standard Chartered Bank of Kenya, Barclays

Bank Limited which are subsidiaries of Standard Chartered Plc and Barclays PLC

respectively, companies incorporated and domiciled in the United Kingdom. Outward

MNCs on the other hand are local companies which have set up operations in foreign

jurisdiction such as Kenya Commercial Bank, Equity bank, Uchumi Supermarkets

and Sameer Africa Limited which are Kenyan based companies with subsidiaries in

Uganda and Tanzania. This study is concerned with large and medium enterprises as

well as inward and outward MNCs enterprises in Kenya.

1.2 Research problem

Transfer pricing has been viewed for many years as a compliance issue whereby tax

revenue authorities have legally required taxpayers to set, prepare, and document

transfer pricing documentation and submit to them (Muhoho, 2012) Additionally,

there are various theories on economics, accounting, taxation and finance aspect of

transfer pricing. They include: economics theory, mathematical programming,

accounting theory and organization behaviour theory. In economic theory, the firm is

viewed as a mini economy in which scarce resources are needed to be allocated and

transfer pricing is used as a mechanism to allocate these resources (Eccles, 1985).

Mathematical programming on the other hand has heavily borrowed from economics

theory. However, it has utilised opportunity cost as the basic concept of determining

transfer pricing rather than marginal cost employed by economic approach. Hence, its

5

objective was to determine the transfer price that yielded the best results for the firm

as a whole (Eccles, 1985). Accounting theory sort to find out the transfer pricing that

would motivate divisional managers to make decision that benefit the firm as a whole

and finally, organization behaviour theory focused on impact of transfer pricing on

individuals and organizations (Kanodia, 1979; Herris, et al... 1982). It concluded that

the technical transfer pricing schemes could not work unless they fit in the

organization and accepted by managers as fair and neutral.

1.3 Conceptual motivation

Of late, transfer pricing has been viewed as a strategic tool that can enable MNC gain

competitive advantage (Muhoho, 2012). This is particularly brought by the fact that

various analysis including functional, risk, economic and bench marking analysis

have to be carried out to come up with an appropriate transfer price and the choice of

transfer price affects the total profit allocation among affiliates of MNC [OECD

Transfer Pricing Guidelines], 2010. There is also a limited literature on transfer

pricing and strategy. (Ngundi, 2012) examines transfer pricing management strategies

by MNC listed in the main investment segment of Nairobi Securities Exchange.

(Muhoho, (2012) examines implementation of transfer pricing as a business strategy

for MNCs. Additionally, strategic management theory (Swieringa and Waterhouse,

1982), has come up with four models from organization theory which attempts to

explain how the organization would handle transfer pricing problem. The models

include: the behaviour model (Cyert and March, 1963) where transfer pricing scheme

is thought to have evolved through goal setting process; the garbage model (Cohen

and March, 1963) where an organization was seen as an entity negotiating to solve

problems but constrained by choices available. Hence, the resultant transfer pricing

scheme would reflect that the problems were worked on in the context of choice; the

organization model which shows that the choice of transfer pricing scheme would be

seen as a means of legitimising past actions and the market and finally, the

hierarchy‟s model which sees transfer pricing as achieved by negotiation and

contracting.

6

1.4 Research objectives

The objective of this study is to determine how MNCs operating in Kenya are

applying transfer pricing as a strategic tool.

1.5 Value of the study

The study hopes to benefit MNCs by enlightening them on the value of transfer

pricing as a strategic tool that can enable them to gain a competitive edge and not to

view it as just a compliance issue where by MNC are regally required to prepare and

submit it to tax revenue authorities. Additionally, given that there is little literature in

the field of transfer pricing and strategy, the study will contribute greatly by adding

knowledge which can be used by academicians, scholars and researchers as reference

point in examining transfer pricing and strategy.

7

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter examines existing knowledge and information on transfer pricing and

competitive strategy. The researcher looks at the findings of different authors and

presents the results of their studies. The chapter will specifically address application

of transfer pricing from various perspectives such as finance, economics and taxation

and specifically emphasise on application of transfer pricing as a strategic tool by

various MNCs.

2.2 The strategic tool concept

According to Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary a tool is anything used to do or

achieve something. It is any item that can be used to achieve a goal, especially if the

item is not consumed in the process. The tools used in strategic management include:

SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunities and threat) analysis, Porter‟s five forces

analysis, PEST (political, economic, social and technical) analysis. The aim of this

study is to find out how transfer pricing is being used as a strategic tool by MNCs to

gain competitive strategy

According to Porter (2008), every firm competing in an industry have a competitive

strategy, whether explicit or implicit. The strategy may have been developed

explicitly through planning process or it may have evolved implicitly through

activities of various functional departments of the firm. The emphasis being placed in

strategic planning today in firms reflects the preposition that there are significant

benefits to gain through an explicit process of formulating strategy, to ensure that the

policies, if not the actions, of functional departments are co-ordinated and directed at

some common set of goals. As Porter (1980) noted, increased attention to formal

strategic planning has highlighted questions that have long been of concern to

managers. They include: drivers of the competition in the industry, what actions

competitors are likely to take, and the best way to respond to competitive pressure,

the best way for a firm to evolve itself to compete in the long run. Essentially,

developing a competitive strategy is developing broad formulas for how a business is

going to compete, what its goals should be, and what policies will be needed to carry

out those goals.

8

2.3 Transfer pricing theories

There are five approaches to transfer pricing that evolved over time to address goal

congruence from a perspective of profit maximization within an organization. The

five approaches include: economic theory, mathematical programming, accounting

theory, organizational behavior theory and strategic management theory. The

economic, mathematical programming and accounting models sought to maximize

profits through determination of an optimal transfer price. The organizational

behavior and strategic management models provided theoretical approaches as to how

the organization might resolve conflict to negotiate a satisfactory transfer price and

bring about goal congruence. In addition, organizational behavior literature provided

direction using the motivational aspects of profits.

2.3.1 Economic Theory

In economic theory, the firm is viewed as a mini-economy in which scarce resources

need to be allocated. Just as in the general economy, prices are a mechanism to

allocate these scarce resources. The objective of the economic theory based

approaches is to find the transfer price that will lead the divisions, both buying and

selling, to choose production levels which maximize total firm profits (Eccles, 1985).

Persons within the organization are viewed as rational utility maximizers (Simon,

1978). Therefore, they hypothetically will not exhibit dysfunctional behaviors that

would lead to a misallocation of the scarce resources.

The literature in the economic theory based approach to transfer pricing is built upon

the Hirshleifer (1956) model. This was the first formal treatment of the transfer

pricing issue from the economics viewpoint (Eccles, 1985; Grabski, 1985). This

model assumed two profit centers: one was a manufacturing division and the other a

distribution division. The manufacturing division had no external market for its

product, whereas the distribution division had a competitive external market.

Hirshleifer (1956) then analyzed the problem under varying demand conditions and

concluded that when a perfectly competitive market exists for the intermediate

product, it should be transferred at the market price. Otherwise, the basic conclusion

yielded was to price along the marginal cost curve for intra-company transfers. This

conclusion held even when the assumption of no external market for the intermediate

9

product was relaxed. This market was then examined under situations of both perfect

and imperfect competition (Eccles, 1985; Grabski, 1985).

2.3.2 Mathematical Programming

As in the economic theory approach, the objective of the mathematical programming

approaches was to determine the transfer price which yielded the best results for the

firm as a whole. However, the mathematical programming approach utilized

opportunity cost as the basic concept for determining transfer prices, rather than

marginal cost as employed by the economic approach. The procedures of this

approach introduced a pricing mechanism which determined the allocation of

resources when constraints on capacity exist or when multiple buying divisions exist

(Eccles, 1985). Most of the linear programming approaches to transfer pricing solved

for profit maximization as the primary constraint. Conversely, Harris, Kriebel and

Raviv (1982) viewed cost minimization as the vehicle to profit maximization. By

using cost minimization under varying levels of information, the authors proposed a

scheme that would penalize divisions for being in efficient. This scheme created a

situation in which transfer prices increase as divisions become more efficient forcing

the divisions to cut costs to maximize profits.

2.3.3 Accounting Theory

The transfer pricing approaches based on accounting theory had the same objective as

the economic theory and mathematical programming approaches: they sought to find

the transfer price that would motivate divisional managers to make decisions that

benefited the firm as a whole. The accounting theory approaches also used the same

assumptions about individual motivation and incentives as the preceding approaches.

The primary focus of this stream of literature was whether market price or some form

of standard variable cost should be used (Eccles, 1985). The first effort to apply

Hirshleifer‟s (1956) theory to accounting was made by Solomons (1965). He

prescribed five different transfer prices applicable to five different environmental

conditions (external markets and extent of internal transfers). The first of these

prescriptions was that market price was applicable when the external market was

highly competitive. Kaplan (1982) later agreed. The next four were for situations

when the external market was not highly competitive. They were for varying forms of

cost, dependent upon how important the transfer price issue was to the organization.

10

The final prescription was for the situation when there was no competitive external

market for the product. He recommended mathematical programming to solve this

situation because the producing division was assumed to be operating under capacity

constraints. Also, it was assumed that most of the producing department‟s goods were

transferred to other departments. Kaplan (1982) would have categorized this

department as a cost center.

2.3.4 Organizational Behavior Theory

Grabski (1985) noted how unusual it was that only a small amount of research

focusing on organizational behavior theory and transfer prices had been published by

the mid-eighties. He stated that it was probably because the transfer pricing technique

was needed before the impact of the method on an individual and an organization can

be addressed. Unfortunately, it appeared that this viewpoint was quite prevalent

because very little research had been done in this area. Yet, most of the problems

pointed out in the complex mathematical models cited the inability to obtain fully

truthful information from divisional managers because their compensation schemes

are tied to divisional profits (Kanodia, 1979; Harris, et al., 1982; Ismail, 1982).

Therefore, the technical transfer pricing schemes could not work unless they fit the

organization, and are accepted by the managers as fair and neutral. Also, for these

models to work, divisional profits must be seen as an appropriate evaluator for

performance.

2.3.5 Strategic Management Theory

The perspective of the whole organization was taken by Swieringa and Waterhouse

(1982). They looked at four models of the organization from organization theory and

attempted to explain how these organization types would handle the transfer pricing

problem. The first model was the behavioral model where the organization was seen

as an entity that focuses on goals, expectations and choices (Cyert and March, 1963).

Goals emerge as a set of constraints which define acceptable performance. These

goals were arrived at by a bargaining process which mixes expectations and demands.

Organizations were also viewed as negotiating an environment to deal with

uncertainty. In this negotiated environment, the actions of participants were

“regularized” as well. Thus the organization learns and adapts over time as a result of

experiences and negotiating/bargaining activities. The transfer pricing scheme was

11

thought to evolve through this organizational learning cycle. Division managers

negotiated acceptable transfer pricing rules which resulted from the goals of cost

savings, reinforcing the decentralized system, etc. (Swieringa and Waterhouse, 1982).

The second model was the Garbage Can Model (Cohen and March‟s, 1963). The

model saw organizations as negotiating to solve problems, but being constrained by

the collection of choices available. The nature of the choices made depended upon a

somewhat complicated intermeshing of a mix of all choices and solutions available,

all problems of the organization faces, and all outside demands. The process of

transfer price choice would reflect this complicated intermeshing. The resultant

transfer price scheme would reflect that problems were worked on in the context of

choice. What was chosen is what would be best for the situation selected from what

happens to be available.

The third model was the organizing model (Weick‟s, 1973) it was a fluid, dynamic

model of change. The organizing process was seen as cyclical. Members of the

organization were seen as creating, or enacting, the environment to which they adapt.

This is because retained interpretations largely determined what actions are responded

to and what meanings are given to those actions. Therefore, the choice of a transfer

pricing rule would be seen as a means of legitimizing past actions, as individuals only

have their retained interpretations by which shape their choices.

The last model was the markets and hierarchies model (Williamson, 1975).

Williamson saw two separate models of achieving cooperation in organizations. The

first was the markets model in which exchanges were achieved by negotiating and

contracting. Bound rationality (limited observational, language and computation

abilities of individuals) precludes individuals from foreseeing or anticipating all

possible courses of action and their contract implications. Williamson discussed how

individuals may create problems in this process due to self-interest, therefore may

make false claims. This has been evidenced in the economic and mathematical

programming literature on transfer pricing. Managers had a disincentive to reveal

truthful information because they would later be evaluated on this information. Thus

the negotiation process of determining a transfer pricing scheme in a markets model

organization could be costly due to time consumed “haggling and negotiating”. The

12

hierarchies model by Williamson (1975) highlighted organizations which economize

on transactions costs by replacing a series of “market contracts” with a single

incomplete employment contract and common resource ownership. Cooperation is

encouraged in this model. Thus in a hierarchy, the best result for the organization as a

whole would be reflected in the transfer price scheme chosen (or in the decision to

purchase the products externally, if that happened to be the best result).

2.4 Application of Transfer pricing as a capital and profit allocation

Very often, MNEs use transfer prices in their inter-company accounts for purposes of

allocating capital and profits between headquarters and subsidiaries. For instance,

Insurance companies use intra-group reinsurance to reduce the amount of capital

which is required by the local regulator and to optimize capital management at a

group level (Bergen & Seymour, 2007). Other financial institutions like banks are

required by regulators in the countries they have set up their operations to have a

minimum amount of capital in order to operate. As such, a bank may seek to lower its

overall regulatory capital requirement by having a trader in a “high” capital country

trade a portfolio held in a “low” capital country. The trader in the “high” capital

country is able to trade the portfolio held in the “low” capital country because from

the counterparty‟s perspective, the bank as a whole has the capital necessary to

support the risks arising from its trading activities. Such cross-border use of capital

creates tax issues that impact directly on the profitability of each party (Howard,

Neighbour, Clair, Preshaw and Martens, 2006).

It is clear from the above literature review that transfer pricing is a strategic tool as

well as a finance, economics and taxation issue for MNCs. Therefore, MNCs are

required to be clear on their strategy and how transfer pricing may be used to realize

such strategies.

13

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter deals with the research methodology as the mode of achieving the

purpose of the study. It specifically highlights the research methods used in carrying

out the study in order to answer the research questions. The various methodological

issues discussed include research design, population, sampling design, data collection

and analysis.

3.2 Research Design

This study adopted a descriptive research design. A descriptive research design was

best for this study as it describes characteristics associated with the subject

population. Descriptive design allows one to establish relationships between variables

(Cooper and Schindler, 2003). It also allows collection of a large quantity of in-depth

data about the population being studied.

3.3 Population of the study

Since the focus of the study was on MNCs operating in Kenya, the population of

interest comprised all MNCs operating in Kenya in the various sectors of the

economy such agriculture, manufacturing, construction, tourism, financial services

amongst others both large and medium enterprises. According to (Economic Survey,

2011), there are over 250 MNCs operating in Kenya.

3.4 Sampling

The population was subsequently stratified according to the respective sectors in the

economy. Simple random sampling was applied within each stratum to arrive at a

sample of 40 MNCs where all the sectors were represented. The sample size was

informed by previous studies done on MNCs which used an average of 30 to 40

MNCs (Ernst and Young, 2008). In addition, this number was well above 10% which

is recommended by Mugenda and Mugenda (1999).

14

3.5 Data Collection

This study relied on both primary and secondary data. Primary data was obtained by

use of a self made questionnaire a copy of which is attached as Appendix I. The

questionnaire had four sections, section one was basically the introduction and stated

the objective of the study, section two contained general information regarding the

respondent and the organization, section three was the substantive section on strategy

and section four was on application of transfer pricing as a strategic tool. The target

respondents for the questionnaire were 40 Senior Managers and Managers working in

the respective MNCs since they had a better understanding of the corporate strategy

and implementation of transfer pricing as a strategic tool.

The main source of secondary data that was relied on this study was information on

the websites of the various MNCs. This helped in understanding MNCs mission,

vision and strategy. Other secondary data sources included Transfer Pricing policies

of MNCS, Articles, and Journals on transfer pricing which were principally used to

understand the MNCs being subject of this study.

3.6 Data Analysis

The collected data was cleaned, edited and entered into a computerized system to

enable carrying out of descriptive statistical analysis of the data. The data was coded

and presented in a thematic manner. Thereafter, the data was analysed using

descriptive statistics and in particular, used the mean as a measure of central

tendency. The data was then tabulated and the most appropriate charts, tables and

graphs chosen to present the findings. Tables were used to enable reading of specific

values while graphs were used to facilitate ease of data representation

15

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the findings based on the data collected during the field work by

way of the questionnaire as a tool. The purpose of this study was to determine how

MNCs operating in Kenya are applying transfer pricing as a strategic tool.

The section therefore presents an analysis of the information obtained with a view to

fulfilling the research objectives as outlined in the study. 40 questionnaires were

distributed to the respondents of which 28 were completed. Thus the response rate

was 70%. The results are presented in the Table 4.1. The list of the companies from

which the responses were received are indicated in the attached Appendix 1.

Table 4.1: Response Rate

Sector Sample size Response

Male Female

Services and tourism 17 8 4

Agriculture 7 4 1

Manufacturing and assembly 16 8 3

Total 40 20 8

16

4.2 General information

The target respondents for the questionnaire were senior finance managers and

departmental heads working in the respective MNCs. The information sort included:

gender, department or area of expertise, position in the organization, years of service,

entities ultimate holders and countries which entities‟ ultimate holders are located.

4.2.1 Department or area of expertise

To find out the department or area of expertise of the respondents involved in the

study. It was found out that 38% of the respondents came from finance department

followed by sales and marketing at 22%, supplies and procurement 16%, human

resource 12% and research and development at 12%. The results are indicated on the

following Figure 4.1

Figure 4.1: Distribution of respondents by background or area of expertise

Target respondents of this study were senior managers and departmental heads of

MNCs since they have better understanding of transfer pricing and strategy.

38%

12%

12%

16%

22%

Finance

Sales & Marketing

Supplies &Procurement

Human resource

Research &Development

17

4.2.2 Positions of the respondents in the organization

It was found that 69% of the respondents were senior managers and departmental

heads and 31% of the respondents were junior managers. The results are indicated on

the following Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2: Respondents’ position in the organization

The findings of the responses, senior managers and departmental heads seemed to

have a better understanding of both business strategy and transfer pricing and the

nexus between this two concepts.

31%

69%

Senior Managers

Managers

4.2.3 Years of Service in the company

The researcher sought to find out the years in service with the company of the

respondents involved in the study. It was found that 52% of the respondents had

between 6-10 years of service, 31% of the respondents had 11-15 years of service,

10% of the respondents had 0-5 years of service, 4% of the respondents had 16-20

years of service and 3% of the respondents had over 25 years of service. The results

are indicated on the following figure 4.3.

18

Figure 4.3: Respondents’ years of service

It appears from the results in the figure 4.3 that more experienced respondents had a

better understanding of transfer pricing and its application on corporate strategy.

3%10%4%

31%

52%

0-5 years

6-10 years

11-15 years

16 - 20 years

over 25 years

4.3 Corporate strategy

4.3.1 Understanding of corporate strategy

The researcher sort to find out whether respondents understood what corporate

strategy is. It was found that, 61% strongly agreed, 26% agreed, 7% remained neutral,

3% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed. Most of the respondents had an

understanding of corporate strategy. The results are indicated on the following Figure

4.4.

Figure 4.4: Corporate strategy

From the responses in figure 4.4, it was observed that most respondents viewed

business strategy as the unifying theme that gives the direction of the organization

geared towards superior performance through establishing competitive advantage. In

addition, most respondents pointed out that strategy acts as a vehicle for

communication and coordination within organizations. Based on these responses it

was concluded that selected sample understand the concept of strategy and as such

their responses are reliable for purposes of this study.

19

3%3%7%

26% 61%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.3.2 Strategy formulation process

The respondents were required to indicate their understanding of strategy formulation

process for the company, As shown in figure 4.5, it was found that, 55% strongly

agreed, 28% agreed, 12% remained neutral, 3% disagreed and 2% strongly disagreed.

Most of the respondents were certain about strategy formulation process. The results

are indicated on the following Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5: Corporate strategy formulation

From the analysis of the detailed response as evident in figure 4.5, most of the

respondents were able to briefly explain the strategy formulation process. Most of

them indicated that corporate strategy is not an event but rather a logical process

which entails a rational analysis of the organization where the current environment is

analyzed and objectives for the future are set hence necessitating revising of an

organization‟s mission and vision. Based on the analysis of the detailed responses it

was concluded that most of the respondents gave information that is reliable for

purposes of this study.

20

2%3%

12%

28%55%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.3.3 Department involvement in strategy formulation

To find out whether the respondents knew whether their departments were involved

in strategy formulation, it was found that, 58% strongly agreed, 28% agreed, 11%

remained neutral, 2% disagreed and 1% strongly disagreed. Most respondents knew

that their departments are involved in strategy formulation. The results are indicated

on the following Figure 4.6.

Figure 4.6: Departments involvements in strategy formulation

1%2%

11%

28% 58%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.3.4 Role of parent company in strategy formulation

The parent company played a significant role in strategy formulation. It was found

that, 44% strongly agreed, 23% agreed, 21% remained neutral, 10% disagreed and

2% strongly disagreed. Most of the respondents agreed that the parent company plays

21

a significant role in strategy formulation. The results are indicated on the following

Figure 4.7.

Figure 4.7: Role of parent company in strategy formulation

1%2%4%

28%

65%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.3.5 Corporate objectives

The respondents knew both short term and long term corporate objectives, it was

found that, 42% strongly agreed, 25% agreed, 14% remained neutral, 13% disagreed

and 6% strongly disagreed. Most of the respondents had a clear knowledge of the

company short term and long term objectives. The results are indicated on the

following Figure 4.8.

Figure 4.8: Corporate objectives

6%

13%

14%

25%

42%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

22

From the detailed responses, it was established that according to most the respondents

corporate objectives is an objective of medium and long term nature that aims either

at exploiting an opportunity or strength, or deals with a threat or a weakness facing

the organization. Most respondents indicated organizations objectives to include

increasing turnover, increasing market share globally, regionally and locally,

increasing profitability, cutting on costs to attain competitive advantage, enhancing

brand perception and quality assurance, increasing production, enhancing technology

and corporate social responsibility amongst others

4.4 Transfer pricing

4.4.1 Understanding of transfer pricing

As far as understanding transfer pricing is concerned, 35% strongly agreed, 26%

remained neutral, 20% disagree, 15% agreed and 4% strongly disagreed. Majority of

the respondents were certain about their understanding of transfer pricing. The results

are indicated on the following Figure 4.9.

Figure 4.9 Understanding of transfer pricing

4%

20%

26%15%

35%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.4.2 Formulation of transfer pricing and objectives corresponding

Attempt was made to find out whether the respondents understood how transfer

pricing between the company and related party is arrived at and objectives there on. It

was found that, 31% strongly agreed, 28% remained neutral, 20% disagree, 17%

agreed and 4% strongly disagreed. A fair number of the respondents understood how

23

the transfer price is set and its objectives. The results are indicated on the following

Figure 4.10.

Figure 4.10: Objectives of transfer pricing

As shown in the figure 4.10, most of the respondents suggested that transfer price is

set to achieve certain objectives such as achieving a given return, minimizing taxes,

recovering costs, supporting subsidiaries and promoting business growth amongst

others.

28%

20%

4%

31%

17%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.4.3 Application of transfer pricing as a strategy

To find out whether transfer pricing is applied as a strategy by MNCs, it was found

that, 35% strongly agreed, 26% agreed, 21% remained neutral, 13% disagreed and

5% strongly disagreed. Most of the respondents had a clear knowledge that transfer

pricing is applied as a strategy. The results are indicated on the following Figure

4.11.

24

Figure 4.11 Application of transfer pricing as strategic tool

16%

13%

5%

40%

26%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

From the detailed responses it was established that most respondents view transfer

pricing as a complex issue which involves a combination of planning and compliance

to meet operational and business objectives. Most respondents indicated ways which

transfer pricing is applied as a strategy to include internal objectives like motivating

subsidiary managers, monitoring performance of foreign subsidiaries and as a means

of achieving goal harmonization between subsidiary managers and the parent

companies. External objectives includes: application of transfer pricing as a means of

minimizing taxes and tariffs like corporate tax and duties on imports and exports , as

a means of controlling foreign exchange risks by minimizing foreign exchange losses,

as a cash management control tool and as a means of avoidance of foreign

government interference. Other strategies include increasing turnover and market

share and as a means of acquiring cheap source of debt and equity.

In order to establish the most common responses of application of transfer pricing as

a strategy, the detailed responses were further analysed as tabulated in table 4.2

below. From the analysis it was established that the most common application include

minimizing overall tax liability of MNC with a 57.14% frequency or popularity.

Other common applications included minimizing tax duties on imports and exports,

market penetration strategy, minimizing foreign exchange losses, motivating

subsidiaries managers, performance and measurement of subsidiaries and avoiding

exchange control restrictions with 50.00%, 42.86%, 39.29%, 38.22%, and 32.14%

respectively. The least common applications included risk analysis and bench

25

marking tool with 10.71% and 7.14% respectively. In addition, a few respondents

also indicated that transfer pricing may be used to support subsidiaries for example

providing stock and raw materials at a favourable price. The results are indicated on

the following Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Application of transfer pricing as strategy analysis

Ranking Business objectives Total

population

Frequency Frequency as

percentage of

total

population

1 Minimizing tax

liability of MNC

28 16 57.14%

2 Minimizing tax duties

on imports and exports

28 14 50.00%

3 Market penetration

strategy

28 12 42.86%

4 Minimizing foreign

exchange losses

28 11 39.29%

5 Motivating subsidiary

managers

28 10 38.22%

6 Performance and

measurements of

subsidiaries

28 9 32.14%

7 Avoiding exchange

control restrictions

28 9 32.14%

8 Acquiring cheap

source of capital

28 5 17.86%

9 Functional and risk

analysis tool

28 3 10.71%

10 Benchmarking tool 28 2 7.14%

The main objective of the study is to determine how MNCs in Kenya are applying

transfer pricing as a strategic tool.

4.4.4 Transfer pricing and level of sales and profits achieved

The respondents were asked to state whether transfer prices affect sales level and

profit achieved by the company. The results are as per figure 4.12. It was found that,

35% strongly agreed, 27% agreed, 18% remained neutral, 13% disagreed and 7%

strongly disagreed. Majority of the respondents were certain that transfer prices affect

sales level as well as profitability. The results are indicated on the following Figure

4.12.

26

Figure 4.12: Transfer pricing and level of sales and profits achieved

18%

13%

7%

35%

27%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.4.5 Transfer pricing as a measure of performance

As to whether transfer pricing is used as a measure of performance. 26% of the

respondents strongly agreed, 24% agreed, 32% remained neutral, 12% disagreed and

6% strongly disagreed. Majority of the respondents were not aware that transfer

pricing is used as a measure of performance for departmental heads. The results are

indicated on the following Figure 4.13.

Figure 4.13: Transfer pricing as a measure of performance

32%

12%

6%

26%

24%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

4.4.6 Transfer pricing and level of intercompany transactions

To find out whether the respondents understood that transfer pricing set by the

company affect the level of other intercompany transactions with related non-resident

27

companies, it was found that, 28% strongly agreed, 23% agreed, 30% remained

neutral, 13% disagreed and 6% strongly disagreed. Majority of the respondents

understands that transfer pricing affects level of intercompany transactions with

related non-resident companies. The results are indicated on the following Figure

4.14.

Figure 4.14: Transfer pricing and level of inter-company transactions

6%

13%

30%23%

28%

Strongly Agreed

Agreed

Neutral

Disagreed

StronglyDisagreed

51% of the respondents agreed that apart from buying and selling transactions

between resident corporate with non resident related corporate, other transactions

affected by transfer pricing include: provision of marketing and logistics support, sale

and lease of tangible and intangible assets, borrowing of money to capitalise the

business among others.

28

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction

This chapter addresses the results and findings of application of transfer pricing as a

strategic tool for MNCs operating in Kenya. The findings are outlined according to

specific objectives of the study. The findings are based on the responses from the

questionnaires filled and information gathered on the research questions. The

researcher provides a discussion on the findings of the research as compared to the

findings in the literature review based on the specific objectives.

5.2 Summary

The objective of this study was to find out how MNCs operating in Kenya are

applying transfer pricing as a strategic tool. The research adopted a descriptive

research design. The population comprised of 40 MNCs operating in Kenya. The

study adopted a stratified and random sampling technique to increase statistical

efficiency and provide adequate data for analyzing the various sub-populations. Data

was collected using questionnaires, edited and analyzed statistically for better and

reliable results. The study used descriptive statistics using statistical indexes such as

frequency, percentage and mode. In using inferential statistics, the data was analyzed

using correlation analyses, which were vital in making sense of the data. The

analyzed data was presented in the form of tables, charts and figures according to the

research questions.

The objective of the study was to find out whether MNCs in Kenya apply transfer

pricing as a strategic tool. The study revealed that in deed most MNCs in Kenya are

using transfer pricing as a strategic tool. Most respondents indicated ways which

transfer pricing is applied to include achieving internal objectives like motivating

subsidiary managers, monitoring performance of foreign subsidiaries and as a means

of achieving goal harmonization between subsidiary managers and the parent

companies. External objectives includes using transfer pricing as a means of

minimizing taxes and tariffs, as a means of controlling foreign exchange risks, as a

cash management control tool and as a means of avoidance of foreign government

interference. Other strategies include increasing turnover and market share and being

29

applied as a means of acquiring cheap source of debt and equity. In addition, a few

respondents also indicated that transfer pricing may be used to support subsidiaries

for example providing stock and raw materials at a favourable price.

Further, to find whether transfer pricing is used as a measure of performance for

departmental heads, it was found out that majority of respondents i.e. above 50%

were not aware that the transfer pricing is used as a measure of performance and to

find out whether transfer pricing affects sales and profits volumes as well as other

inter-company transactions. It was found out that majority of respondents were in

agreement.

5.3 Conclusions

In contrast to a purely finance, economic and tax-driven mechanism, transfer pricing

can be considered as a tool for advancing MNCs strategy in Kenya. Results indicate

that executives are not solely focused on finance, economics and taxation issues as

the primary objective of transfer pricing.

MNCs in Kenya employ transfer pricing to assist in achieving corporate strategy and

other corporate objectives as well. In general, executives perceive that transfer pricing

does influence measures of corporate performance. This is supported by the finding

that transfer pricing also contributes toward achieving objectives. Among the

business strategies that MNCs seek to achieve through transfer pricing include market

penetration strategies including increasing turnover and market share, tax

minimization strategies, cost of capital as well as cash flow strategies. The study

further revealed that such strategies are achieved by adjusting the transfer price

between related parties which is possible due to common control between related

parties.

30

5.4 Limitation of the study

This study is limited to the extent that it concentrated on inward MNCs largely

because Kenya is a developing country and as such it has more inward MNCs as

opposed to outward MNCs. With revamping of the East Africa Community it is

expected that more outward MNCs will come up, a study with a balanced number of

inward and outward MNCs would provide better and balanced analysis.

Some respondents opted to remain neutral to some questions in the questionnaire

while other completely refused to respond this study due to the sensitive nature of the

information sought, some respondents indicated that pricing decision are secret as it

comprises companies competition strategies while others feared that the information

may find it ways with the KRA and thus get victimized.

This study was also limited by way resources such as time. Due to time constraints

the researcher was not able follow up on all the respondents and especially where

responses were not forth coming after severally follow up calls and email reminders.

5.5 Recommendation for further research

The transfer pricing environment is constantly changing, in terms of both risks and

opportunities. MNCs therefore need to ensure they stay up-to-date with the latest

developments and transfer pricing best practices. In doing so, they can optimize the

opportunities to apply transfer pricing as strategic tool and at the same time reduce

their global effective tax rate and ensure they remain compliant with changing

guidelines and regulations, while at the same time minimizing the risks associated

with a transfer pricing audit.

MNCs should enhance their understanding of what transfer pricing means and how

transfer pricing is applied as a strategic management tool. Further, the employees of

MNCs should understand the nexus between transfer pricing and strategy.

In addition, the researcher proposes that future researchers should focus on examining

various ways of managing transfer pricing risks and challenges especially in

emerging markets and develop on the limited theoretical framework on the topic.

31

REFERENCES

Alms, M. Rutges, D., Soh, G. & Uceda, A. (2008). Managing transfer pricing risks in

M&A. Bureau of National Affairs, pp. 26-31.

Anandarajan, A., McGhee, M. & Curatola, A.P. (2007). A Guide to International

Transfer Pricing. The Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, pp. 33-39.

Azemar, C. (2010). International corporate taxation and US multinationals‟

behaviour: an integrated approach. Canadian Journal of Economics.

Azemar, C. & Corcos, G. (2009). Multinational Firms‟ Heterogeneity in Tax

Responsiveness: The Role of Transfer pricing. The World Economy, pp.1291,

1297-1304.

Abdallah, W. & Murtuza, A. (2004). Transfer pricing strategies of intangible assets,

ecommerce and international taxation of multinationals. International Tax

Journal.

Bergen, H. & Seymour, G. (2007). Building a Robust Defence Transfer Pricing.

KPMG Frontiers in Finance.

Bordens, S. K. & Abbot, B.B. (1995). Research Design and Methods. A Process

Approach, 3rd Ed. London, Mayfield Publishing Company.

Cooper, D. & Schindler, P. (2003). Business Research Methods. (7th Ed.) New York:

McGraw Hill.

Crowl, T. K. (1993). Fundamentals of Educational Research. Madison: WI.

Cole, D. 1996, Benefits and challenges of MNCS

Cyert and March, (1963). Economic Foundations of Strategy

Czinkota and Ronkainen, (2007), Global business: Positioning ventures ahead

Business Dictionary. (www.businessdictionary.com).

Dhawale, H., Horiguchi, D., Luquet, P., Manasuev, A. & Slimmen, R. (2008). A

meeting of minds- Resolving transfer pricing controversies: Getting to grips

with Transfer Pricing Risk. KPMG International.

Ernst & Young. (2008). Global Transfer pricing survey.

Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. Economic Survey, (2012)

Eden Lorraine, (1998) International Taxation, Transfer Pricing and the Multinational

Enterprise, Oxford Handbook of International Business.

32

Eccles, R., “Control with Fairness in Transfer Pricing.” Harvard Business Review

(November-December 1985), pp. 149-161.

Feinschreiber, R. & Kent, M. (2008). Permanent Establishment Issues Impact Indian

Transfer Pricing. Corporate Business Taxation Monthly, pp.29-42.

Foley, S. & Mantegani, B. (2005). Transfer pricing penalties: A practical guide to

reducing exposure through contemporaneous documentation. World Finance,

pp.39.

Foley, S., Klopfer, J., Waldens, S. & Wulfekuhler, K. (2008). Aligning Operational

and Legal Transfer Pricing. World Finance, pp.70-72.

Ganapati B, „Transfer pricing, Tax Havens and Global Governance’, (German

Development Institute, 2009).

Grabski, S., “Transfer Pricing in Complex Organizations: A Review and Integration

of Recent Empirical and Analytical Research,” Journal of Accounting

Literature (vol. 4, 1985), pp. 33-75.

Harris, M., C. Kriebel and A. Raviv, “Asymjetric Information, Incentives and

Intrafirm Resource Allocation,” Management Science (June 1982), pp. 604-

620.

Hirshleifer (1956). Taxing Multinationals: Transfer Pricing and Corporate Income

Taxation in North America.

Hyde, C.E. & Choe, C. (2005). Keeping two sets of books: The relationship between

tax and incentive transfer prices. Journal of Economics & Management

Strategy, pp.165-169.

Hill, D.C. (2007). Transfer Pricing 101. CMA Management, pp. 36 -39.

Klopfer, J., Peters, D. & Waldens, S. (2007). The challenge to align operational and

legal transfer pricing. International Tax Review, pp.63-65.

Kaplan, R. Advanced Management Accounting (Prentice-Hall, 1982).

Kaplan, R., “Measuring Manufacturing Performance: A New Challenge for

Managerial Accounting Research,” The Accounting Review (October, 1983),

pp. 686-705.

Kanodia, C., “Risk Sharing and Transfer Price Systems under Uncertainty,” Journal

of Accounting Research (Spring 1982), pp. 74-98

Income Tax Act Chapter 470, of the Laws of Kenya.

Investopidia Dictionary (www.investopedia.com).

International Tax Review; Oct 2007, Vol. 18 Issue 9, pp37-39.

33

Ismail, B., “Transfer Pricing under Demand Uncertainty,” Review of Business and

Economic Research (Fall, 1982), pp.1-14.

Johnson, G and Scholes, K. (2003). Exploring corporate strategy, Text and cases,

Sixth Edition

Kenya Revenue Authority: The Tax Point- Large Taxpayers Office; September 2009,

Vol 5, pp2

Kenya Revenue Authority: The Tax Point: Large Taxpayers Office; January 2010,

Vol 7, pp1

Li, J. (2006). Transfer Pricing Audits in Australia, China and New Zealand: A

Developed VS. Developing Countries Perspective. International Tax

Journal/Fall, pp.21.

Martinson, O.B., Englebrecht, T.D. & Mitchell, C. (1999). How Multinationals Firms

can profit from sophisticated transfer pricing strategies. The Journal of

Corporate Accounting and Finance/Winter, pp. 91, 97-103.

Milewska, M., Barrett, F. & de Mendoza, M.H. (2009). Review of Transfer Pricing in

Mexico. International Tax Review, pp.3-7.

Muhoho P. (2012) „Implementation of Transfer Pricing as a Business Strategy for

Multinational Corporations in Kenya: University of Nairobi Unpublished

research project‟.

Mugenda Olive M. & Mugenda Abel G (1999). Research Methods: Quantitive and

qualitative approaches

Nyamori, B. „an analysis of Kenya‟s Transfer Pricing regime‟. 19 Intl. Transfer

Pricing J.2 (2012), Journals IBFD.

Ngundi M. (2012) „Transfer Pricing Managment Strategies by Multinational

Enterprises Within The Main Investment of The Nairobi Securities Exchange:

University of Nairobi Unpublished research project‟.

Organization of Economic Co-operation Development Report (2009), Transfer

Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations.

OECD Report, „Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax

Administrations’ 1995.

Oxford Analytica (2010), “MNCs face increasing global complexity”

Oguttu, A.W., “Transfer pricing and Tax Avoidance: Is the Arm’s Length Principle

Still Relevant in the e-Commerce Era”, 2006 18 SA Merc LJ at 138.

Preshaw, D., Trapé, M., Van Stappen, D. & Vincent, F. (2008). Transfer Pricing

Developments at the OECD. International Tax Review, pp.11-15.

34

Porter, Michael, (1980) Competitive Strategy, New York: Free press.

Porter, Michael, (2008) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior

Performance

Feinschreiber, R. and Hammer (2001), Transfer Pricing Handbook.

Ralph, D. & Reimers, J.L. (2009). Global transfer pricing: a practical guide for

managers. SAM Advanced Management Journal, pp.4-10.

Robertis, G., Kaut, M. & Preshaw, D. (2006). Business reorganizations and exit

charges. International Tax Review, pp.17-22.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2000). Research Methods for Business

Students. (2nd Edition). London: Prentice Hall.

Schwarz, P. (2009). Tax Avoidance Strategies of American Multinationals: An

Empirical Analysis. Managerial and Decision Economics.

Silverman, J., Carmichael, P., & Herr, T. (2008). Sarbanes Oxley and its implications

for transfer pricing. International Tax Review, pp 65-69.

Simon, H., “Rationality as Process and a Product of Thought,” The American

Economic Review Proceedings (May 1978), pp. 1-16.

Solomons (1965). Divisional Performance: Measurement and Control. Swieringa and Waterhouse, (1982). Management Accounting: Principles and Applications,

pp 251.

Tang, (1997). Economic Theories of International Environment cooperation.

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, „Transfer Pricing‟ United

Nations Publication, UNCTAD/ITE/IIT/11(vol I), 1999.

Williamson, O. , Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications in

Seieringa and Waterhouse.

Weick, (1973). Organizational Learning and Competitive Advantage.

World investment report (2008): Transnational corporations and the infrastructure

challenge.

35

APPENDICIES

APPENDIX I: LIST OF MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION SELECTED

FOR STUDY

SERVICES AND TOURISM

1. SIEMENS LIMITED

2. WESTCON AFRICA (KENYA) LIMITED

3. TARPO INDUSTIES LIMITED

4. ERICSSON LIMITED

5. ESSAR TELECOM KENYA LIMITED

6. AIG KENYA CO LTD

7. BARCLAYS BANK

8. KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK

9. STANDARD CHARTERED

10. EQUITY BANK

11. TOTAL KENYA LIMITED

12. DHL WORLDWIDE EXPRESS KENYA LIMITED

13. KENOL KOBIL

14. AMIRAN COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED

15. SDV TRANSAMI KENYA LIMITED

16. VINTAGE AFRICA LIMITED

17. TPS SERENA EAST AFRICA LIMITED

AGRICULTURE

1. JAMES FINLAY LIMITED

2. HOMEGROWN KENYA LIMITED

3. SYNGENTA EAST AFRICA LIMITED

4. BEAUTY LINE LIMITED

5. AFRI VENTURES KENYA LIMITED

6. GLOBAL COMMODITIES EAST AFRICA LTD

7. AMIRAN KENYA LIMITED

MANUFACTURING AND ASSEBLY

1. DT DOBIE (EA) LIMITED

2. TOYOTA EAST AFRICA LIMITED

3. GENERAL MOTORS EAST AFRICA LIMITED

4. BEIERSDORF E A LTD

5. PZ CUSSONS E.A LTD

36

6. PROCTER & GAMBLE (EA) LTD

7. NESTLE FOODS KENYA LIMITED

8. EAST AFRICAN CABLES LTD

9. EAST AFRICA PACKAGING INDUSTRIES LTD

10. SCHENKER LIMITED

11. UNILEVER KENYA LIMITED

12. BATA SHOE COMPANY

13. GLAXOSMITHKLINE LIMITED

14. HENKEL CHEMICALS EAST AFRICA LIMITED

15. SAMEER AFRICA LIMITED

16. COCA COLA EAST AND CENTRAL AFRICA

Source: Nairobi stock exchange

37

APPENDIX 2: QUESTIONAIRE

“APPLICATION OF TRANSFER PRICING AS A STRATEGIC TOOL BY

MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS IN KENYA”

SECTION I: INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

This questionnaire is prepared to seek your assistance in providing information on

application of transfer pricing as a strategic tool. This will assist me in conducting my

research project in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Masters of

Business Administration. The information obtained will only be used for academic

purposes and shall be treated in confidence.

SECTION II: GENERAL INFORMATION

Personal Information:

1. Name:…………………………………………………………………………..

2. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( )

3. Name of Company/Entity:……………………………………………………..

4. Department or area of expertise…………………………………………………

5. Job level/ position……………………………………………………………….

6. Years of service with the company:

0 – 5 ( ) 16 – 20 ( )

6 – 10 ( ) Over 25

11 – 15 ( )

7. Company/Entity ultimate holding company:……………………………………

8. Country in which the company/entity‟s ultimate holding company is located

…………………………………………………………………………………

38

9. Country (ies) in which the company/entity‟s other related parties are located attach

a (Attach a separate schedule if need be…………………………………...

10. Does your organization trade with its related entities? …….. if yes, list down the

trade items …………………………………………………………………….

SECTION III: CORPORATE STRATEGY

Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements by using a

scale of 1 to 4 where 1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neither agree nor disagree,

4=agree, 5 = strongly agree. Tick (√) which best describes your opinion of the

statement in reference application of transfer pricing. In addition, please provide brief

comments on the additional questions based on your response to the statement.

1. I understand what strategy is:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

Provide a brief description of what strategy is ........................................................

2. I can describe the process of strategy formulation for the company:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

Provide a brief description of strategy formulation process....................................

3. I know that the department I am working for is involved in strategy formulation:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

39

4. The parent company plays a significant role in strategy formulation:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

5. I know the company‟s long term and short term objectives:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

List the long term and short term objectives:...........................................................

SECTION IV: TRANSFER PRICING

Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements by using a

scale of 1 to 4 where 1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neither agree nor disagree,

4=agree, 5 = strongly agree. Tick (√) which best describes your opinion of the

statement in reference application of transfer pricing. In addition, please provide brief

comments on the additional questions based on your response to the statement.

1. I understand what transfer pricing is:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

2. I understand how the transfer pricing between the company and related party is

arrived at and objectives there on:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

State the objectives...................................................................................................

40

3. Transfer pricing is applied as a strategic tool in the company:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

Describe ways in which transfer pricing is applied................................................

4. Transfer prices affect the sales level and profits achieved by the company:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

5. Transfer prices are used as a measure of performance for departmental heads:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

6. Transfer prices set by the company affect the level of other intercompany

transactions with related non-resident companies:

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Agree

Indicate the other transactions..................................................................................

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONTRIBUTION