Editing Transfer pricing (section)

===Cost plus and resale price issues===
U.S. rules apply resale price method and cost-plus with respect to goods strictly on a transactional basis.<ref>26 CFR 1.482-3(c)(2) and (d)(2).</ref>  Thus, comparable transactions must be found for all tested transactions in order to apply these methods.  Industry averages or statistical measures are not permitted.  Where a manufacturing entity provides contract manufacturing for both related and unrelated parties, it may readily have reliable data on comparable transactions.  However, absent such in-house comparables, it is often difficult to obtain reliable data for applying cost-plus.

The rules on services expand cost-plus, providing an additional option to mitigate these data problems.<ref>26 CFR 1.482-9(c)</ref>  Charges to related parties for services not in the primary business of either the tested party or the related party group are rebuttably presumed to be arm's length if priced at cost plus zero (the services cost method).  Such services may include back-room operations (e.g., accounting and data processing services for groups not engaged in providing such services to clients), product testing, or a variety of such non-integral services.  This method is not permitted for manufacturing, reselling, and certain other services that typically are integral to a business.

U.S. rules also specifically permit shared services agreements.<ref>26 CFR 1.482-9(c).</ref>  Under such agreements, various group members may perform services which benefit more than one member.  Prices charged are considered arm's length where the costs are allocated in a consistent manner among the members based on reasonably anticipated benefits.  For instance, shared services costs may be allocated among members based on a formula involving expected or actual sales or a combination of factors.