Senegal

To see the determinations and rating of all published reports click here.

Overall Phase 2 Rating is Largely Compliant

Table of Determinations and Ratings of the Phase 2 Review

Jurisdictions should ensure that ownership and identity information for all relevant entities and arrangements is available to their competent authorities. (ToR A.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   Senegal recently passed a law on waqfs. Whereas the law seems to clearly frame these entities and allow for the identification of all relevant persons, all the implementation regulations have not been published yet.  The Senegalese authorities should ensure that the 2015 law on waqfs is correctly implemented in practice. 
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Largely Compliant.  The OHADA Uniform Act on commercial companies and economic interest groupings, as amended din 2014, provides for the dematerialisation or conversion of bearer shares. The three companies that have issued bearer shares have not taken appropriate measures on expiry of the transition period (May 2016) to comply with the law and have been summoned to do so.  The Senegalese authorities should monitor and take appropriate measures to ensure the dematerialisation or conversion in registered shares of all bearer shares in practice. 
Jurisdictions should ensure that reliable accounting records are kept for all relevant entities and arrangements. (ToR A.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
Banking information should be available for all account-holders. (ToR A.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
Competent authorities should have the power to obtain and provide information that is the subject of a request under an exchange of information arrangement from any person within their territorial jurisdiction who is in possession or control of such information (irrespective of any legal obligation on such person to maintain the secrecy of the information). (ToR B.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
The rights and safeguards (e.g. notification, appeal rights) that apply to persons in the requested jurisdiction should be compatible with effective exchange of information. (ToR B.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
Exchange of information mechanisms should provide for effective exchange of information. (ToR C.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
The jurisdictions' network of information exchange mechanisms should cover all relevant partners. (ToR C.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.     Senegal should continue to develop its EOI network with all relevant partners. 
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
The jurisdictions' mechanisms for exchange of information should have adequate provisions to ensure the confidentiality of information received. (ToR C.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
The exchange of information mechanisms should respect the rights and safeguards of taxpayers and third parties. (ToR C.4)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Compliant.     
The jurisdiction should provide information under its network of agreements in a timely manner. (ToR C.5)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The assessment team is not in a position to evaluate whether this element is in place, as it involves issues of practice that are dealt with in the Phase 2 review.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Largely Compliant.  During the period 2012-2014, Senegal only rarely provided requesting authorities with a status update of their EOI requests when the relevant authority has not been able to respond within 90 days of the request being made.  Senegal is recommended to rapidly implement a system allowing it to provide requesting authorities with a status update of their requests when the relevant authority has not been able to respond within 90 days of the request being made. 
EOI requests received during the peer review period were dealt with on a case-by-case basis with uneven results but the main partner of Senegal remains generally satisfied with the responses received. As the Information Exchange Unit was formed in December 2015 and its manual is currently being written, its effectiveness could not be tested in practice.  Senegal is recommended to monitor the progress of the writing and implementation of the EOI manual, as well as the processing and management of requests for information, in order to guarantee the follow up of files and due process. 

Earlier self-assessment based annual reports entitled Tax Co-operation 2010: Towards a Level Playing Field are also available.