Question

急急！！可以帮忙翻译一段英语么？不要在线翻译的那种。谢谢！！

While no standard approach for management purposes has evolved to set transfer prices ex ante,in the tax-world(ex post)the Arm's Length Principle(ALP)is the internationally accepted benchmark.Interestingly,as our case studies indicate many of MNEs make use of one or the other Transfer Pricing Method(TPM），actually designed for tax purposes,to derive ex ante transfer prices with the consequence that the incentive features within the organization are distorted.In addition,an increasing criticism on the theoretical foundations and practical merits comes with the use of the ALP. In particular, one can argue that a too narrow,or even often inappropriate,interpretation of the ALP causes shortcomings in the mainstream transfer pricing approach and the corresponding use of TPM.7
For example, mainstream transfer pricing often
does not reflect the facets of governing uncertainty, market size, internal knowledge, and
incentives from residual income.
For us, the most obvious reason for this inadequacy of the mainstream approach in transfer
pricing seems to be the discrepancy between the multilaterally value-adding business processes
through various degrees of integrated multinational organizations versus the existing tax-world
model of bilateral cross-border transactions which are deemed œ according to this tax-world
model œ identifiable and, hence, separable from each other, and, hence, comparable with stand-
alone firms. However, insights from organization theory tell a different story on the governance
and pricing of intra-organizational transactions.
Though tax-world transfer pricing with its ex post nature of defending arm´s length behaviour
resorts, at least to some degree, to internationally practised standard procedures to value business
processes (e.g. function and risk analysis; applying a certain TPM for the transaction type
considered; identifying a corresponding set of comparables; establishing the interquartile Arm´s
Length Range; documentation), tax practitioners are in search of more sound concepts to allocate
income in such a way that business economics of the underlying multi-functional value-adding
processes is more accurately accounted for.8For business-world transfer pricing with its ex ante
nature, it is arguable to what extent transfer pricing should reflect arm´s length features.

Answer 1

虽然没有标准的方法进行管理的目的已经发展到事前设定的转让价格在税收世界（事后）ARM的交易原则（ALP）的，是国际公认的benchmark.Interestingly，因为我们的案例研究表明，许多跨国公司利用一个或其他转让定价方法（TPM）的，其实税务目的而设计的，以获取其结果是组织内的激励功能distorted.In此外，在理论基础和实践价值越来越多的批评事前转移价格随着来自工党使用。特别，我们可以说，一个工党过于狭窄，甚至经常不恰当，解释导致转让定价方法的主流的缺点和使用相应的TPM.7
例如，转让定价往往主流
不反映执政的不确定性，市场规模，内部知识的各个方面，并
奖励，剩余收益。
对于我们来说，这种转移的主流做法，最明显的理由不足
价格似乎是多边之间差异的增值业务流程
通过组织不同程度的综合型跨国企业相对于现行的税收世界
两国跨境交易的模式，被视为œ根据这项税款的世界
œ识别模型，因此，彼此分离，并因此，可比独立
单独的公司。然而，从组织理论的见解告诉了关于治理的不同故事
和定价组织内的交易。
尽管税收，其捍卫世界公平行为性质的转让定价事后
度假村，至少在一定程度上实行国际标准程序，以价值的业务
过程（如功能和风险分析;申请交易类型有一定的TPM
考虑;确定一个相应的比较数据集;建立四分臂的
长度范围，文档），税务从业人员在更健全的分配概念搜索
收入在这样一种方式，商业经济学基础的多功能增值
过程是更准确地核算与事前for.8For商业世界的转让定价
自然，这是有争议的转让定价在何种程度上应反映公平的功能。

Answer 2

was it yesterday

Answer 3

我的个神啊，找老外去！