Transfer Pricing in the Oil and Gas Industry: Unique Challenges and Considerations

Authors

  • Wasiu Babalola Atiba University Oyo
  • Oyedokun, G. E Lead City University, Ibadan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47747/jat.v6i1.3248

Keywords:

Advance Pricing Agreements,, Base Erosions, Oil and Gas Industry, Nigeria Tax Compliance, Profit Shifting, Transfer Pricing

Abstract

This study critically examines the unique challenges and considerations associated with transfer pricing in the oil and gas industry. The primary aim is to explore the complexities surrounding intercompany transactions, valuation of commodities and intangibles, regulatory frameworks, and the implications of environmental and digital transformations. Employing a socio-legal study relying on qualitative and comparative methods and doctrinal methodology, the paper synthesizes insights from international guidelines (OECD, UN), national regulations, and industry-specific case studies, notably the Chevron-Australia dispute. It reveals that despite the availability of public commodity pricing, pricing intercompany crude oil and gas transfers remains complex due to quality differentials, contract structures, and regional benchmarks. The valuation of intangibles such as proprietary technology and seismic data is further complicated by the lack of comparables and centralized R&D structures. Regulatory divergence across jurisdictions, including formula-based systems like Brazil’s and hybrid models in Nigeria, increases compliance burdens for multinational enterprises (MNEs). Environmental and digital economy factors are also observed to be reshaping transfer pricing strategies, with carbon pricing and data-driven operations requiring new valuation models. The study concludes that a one-size-fits-all approach to transfer pricing is inadequate for the oil and gas sector. Instead, tailored strategies that reflect economic substance, greater adoption of Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs), and the use of technology for local compliance are vital for mitigating disputes, ensuring tax equity, and enhancing transparency in one of the world’s most strategically important industries.

Author Biography

Oyedokun, G. E, Lead City University, Ibadan

Legal Scholar and Professor of Management & Financial Development

References

Australian Taxation Office (ATO). (2017). Chevron decision and implications for transfer pricing. Retrieved from https://www.ato.gov.au accessed 24 May 2025 10.00

BEPS (2024), for the list of all the countries acting as members of the inclusive framework on BEPS, refer to OECD's Members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS. <http://www.oecd.org/ctp/beps/inclusive-framework-on-beps-composition.pdf> accessed May 23, 2025

Chevron Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v. Commissioner of Taxation [2017] FCAFC 62

Ernst & Young Global Limited. (2020). Transfer pricing in the oil and gas industry. EY Global Reports.

European Commission. (2022). EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu accessed 24 May 2025 11.00

Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS). (2018). Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Regulations, 2018.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS). (2020). Transfer pricing audit roadmap. United States Treasury Department.

International Monetary Fund. (2022). Taxing natural resources: Challenges of transfer pricing and fiscal transparency. IMF Working Papers.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2017). Transfer pricing guidelines for multinational enterprises and tax administrations. OECD Publishing.

PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2021). Transfer pricing perspectives in the energy industry. PwC Global Insights.

Shell India Markets Private Limited v. CIT (2020) 206 TTJ 405 (Mum.)(Trib.) S. 263

United Nations. (2021). United Nations practical manual on transfer pricing for developing countries (2nd ed.). United Nations.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-31

How to Cite

Babalola, W., & Oyedokun, G. E. (2026). Transfer Pricing in the Oil and Gas Industry: Unique Challenges and Considerations. Journal of Accounting and Taxation, 6(1), 55 - 70. https://doi.org/10.47747/jat.v6i1.3248