x

The Exchange of Tax Information Portal is an initiative of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes. The Global Forum conducts peer reviews of its member jurisdictions' ability to co-operate with other tax administrations in accordance with the internationally agreed standard. The standard provides for exchange of information on request where it is foreseeably relevant to the administration and enforcement of the domestic tax laws of the requesting jurisdiction. Effective exchange of information requires that jurisdictions ensure information is available, that it can be obtained by the tax authorities and that there are mechanisms in place allowing for the exchange of that information. The Global Forum's peer review process examines both the legal and regulatory aspects of exchange (Phase 1 reviews) and the exchange of information in practice (Phase 2). The EOI Portal will track the development of these peer reviews, including changes that jurisdictions make in response to the Global Forum's recommendations.

Peer Review: FYROM Phase 2 Report

This report for Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has been published on 4 Aug 2014. You can buy this report, or browse it online below.

Skip directly to the Executive Summary. You may also want to view the tables of determinations and ratings.


loading...


Determinations and Recommendations

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.      
Phase 2 Rating Factors Recommendations
Largely Compliant.  The Republic did not have a regular oversight program in place to monitor the compliance of the obligations to maintain accurate and updated ownership and identity information for limited liability companies, foreign companies and partnerships during the review period.  The Republic should monitor the compliance of the legal obligations to maintain accurate and updated ownership and identity information for limited liability companies, foreign companies and partnerships and exercise its enforcement powers as appropriate to ensure that such information is available 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.   The scope of the accounting obligations under the Law on Tax Procedure is unclear and does not expressly cover professionals acting as trustees of foreign trusts. There are no other obligations in the Republic’s laws which require maintenance of accounting information related to foreign trusts administered in the Republic or in respect of which a trustee is resident in the Republic.  The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia should clarify the scope of the accounting keeping requirements under the tax law and ensure that accounting information is kept for foreign trusts administered in the Republic or in respect of which a trustee is resident in the Republic. 
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
Largely Compliant.  Article 60 of the Tax Procedure Law has not been used in practice for EOI purposes. The audit procedure has generally worked in practice, but is not perfectly adapted for EOI purposes and there have been instances where these limitations have prevented effective exchange of information.   The Republic should ensure that the access powers available to its competent authority are used effectively to obtain information in all cases and where necessary clarify its laws and procedures to ensure that its access powers can be fully implemented for EOI purposes.  
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.     The Republic should continue to develop its EOI network and conclude agreements to the standard 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
Compliant.  The Republic did not provide status updates where a request could not be answered within 90 days on a systematic basis. The procedures outlined in the new guidelines are new and the Republic is required to monitor that status updates are provided to its treaty partners where relevant.  The Republic should monitor that status updates are provided to the requesting jurisdictions where relevant.