Malta’s new transfer pricing disclosure requirements

Where we stand

TRA 135 applies for the first time in respect of year of assessment 2026 (financial years ended during 2025). It is a mandatory attachment for taxpayers with cross-border related-party arrangements, including those who conclude that the Transfer Pricing Rules (‘Rules’) do not apply to them.

That last point deserves emphasis. Where the Rules (S.L. 123.207) are not engaged, TRA 135 must still be completed, setting out the reason for non-applicability; for example, the SME exclusion, the de minimis thresholds, the grandfathering provision. In other words, a negative conclusion is itself a positive disclosure, made under self-assessment.

Where the Rules do apply, the attachment calls for structured, transaction-level information, including:

• the name and jurisdiction of the associated enterprise;
• the business activity of that associated enterprise;
• a description of the arrangement within scope;
• the transfer pricing methodology applied; and
• the transaction value and the corresponding arm's length amount.

These disclosures are in addition to, not in substitution for, the Master File and Local File obligations that may already apply.

What you should be thinking

TRA 135 raises broader questions than simply how to complete a new attachment. It requires taxpayers to consider whether their transfer pricing framework, its implementation, and its supporting evidence are ready for a more transparent and data-driven environment.

1. The scoping conclusion is now a disclosed position

For many Maltese taxpayers, the most consequential entry on TRA 135 will be the one asserting that the Rules do not apply. That conclusion now has to be stated to the MTCA rather than simply held internally.

Scoping under the Maltese Rules is not always mechanical. SME status is determined by reference to Annex I of Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 and must be assessed after aggregating partner and linked enterprises: a group-level test, not an entity-level one. The association thresholds (more than 75%, reduced to more than 50% for constituent entities of MNE groups within the scope of CbC reporting) require care where control arises through indirect holdings or through constitutive documents rather than shareholdings. The de minimis thresholds of €6 million (revenue items) and €20 million (capital items) are aggregate tests and based on the arm’s length principle. And the grandfathering of arrangements entered into before 1 January 2024 falls away for financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2027; so a conclusion that is correct this year may not survive the next filing cycle.

Where the answer is "out of scope", the supporting analysis should be documented to the same standard you would expect of an in-scope position.

2. The continuing relevance of existing policies

Many transfer pricing policies were developed years ago, while business models, value chains, industries, economic environments and profit drivers have moved on. TRA 135 creates a natural occasion to reassess whether those policies remain aligned with the actual allocation of functions, assets and risks within the group.

This matters particularly where there have been restructurings, changes in operating model, the build-out of capability in a particular jurisdiction, or significant shifts in profitability.

3. The coherence of the overall transfer pricing story

TRA 135 disclosures will sit alongside the corporate income tax return itself, statutory financial statements, Master File and Local File documentation, CbC report information where relevant, DAC6 disclosures, and publicly available information.

Differences between those sources may be entirely legitimate. But taxpayers should be able to explain them clearly and consistently. The question worth asking internally is not whether each document is defensible on its own, but whether the sources available to the MTCA collectively tell a coherent story about the business and its transfer pricing arrangements. 

4. The level of explanation required for outcomes that may attract attention

Structured, comparable disclosure makes certain features more readily identifiable: financing arrangements, profit-split arrangements, restructurings, transfers of intangibles, changes in policy, and transfer pricing adjustments.

Outcomes that are entirely supportable may nonetheless require a clearer evidential foundation once viewed alongside a broader population of taxpayers. That does not mean converging toward a perceived industry norm, but differences will become easier to identify, and taxpayers should be prepared to explain why their own facts and circumstances justify those outcomes.

5. Operational readiness

For many groups the most immediate challenge is practical rather than technical. TRA 135 requires transaction data to be identified, extracted, categorised and reconciled across systems, often at a level of granularity not previously needed for routine Maltese compliance. Financing arrangements, permanent establishments, high volumes of intercompany transactions and complex operating models can each present difficulty.

For some groups the difficulty will be less about locating the information than about deciding how it should be classified, aggregated and reported consistently across entities and across reporting periods. Data governance, systems capability and reporting process are, on this measure, becoming as important as the transfer pricing analysis itself. Choices made in this first filing will set the baseline against which subsequent years are read.

In short

Preparing for TRA 135 is not simply a question of completing a new attachment. It is a question of whether policies, outcomes, documentation, governance and underlying data combine to present a coherent and defensible picture of the group's transfer pricing position, one that will now be visible to the MTCA in structured form, year on year.

The first filing sets the reference point. It is worth getting right.

How we can help?

We can assist with scoping assessments and their documentation, preparation and review of TRA 135 disclosures, Local File and Master File preparation, benchmarking, review of intercompany agreements against operational conduct, and readiness reviews of the underlying data and reporting processes.

Let's talk

Contact our Transfer Pricing team to discuss how the new disclosure requirements may impact your business.