UJA Global Advisory Logo New
Read Time: 4 min

Cross-Border Secondment in India: What Are the Tax Complexities?

Tax Complexities of Cross-Border Secondment in India

Cross-border secondment arrangements have become an integral component of multinational business models. Global organizations frequently deploy personnel across jurisdictions to facilitate knowledge transfer, strengthen governance, implement group policies, support strategic projects and bridge talent gaps. In recent years, Indian tax authorities and courts have increasingly focused on the substance of secondment arrangements rather than their contractual characterization. Consequently, businesses must carefully evaluate the economic employer relationship, tax treaty implications, Permanent Establishment (PE) risks, withholding tax obligations, GST exposure & compliance requirements before implementing a secondment structure.

Understanding Cross-Border Secondment

A cross-border secondment typically involves an employee of a foreign entity being temporarily assigned to work with an Indian group company or vice versa.

The principle objectives generally include:

  • Transfer of technical expertise and know-how
  • Implementation of global business processes
  • Leadership development and succession planning
  • Standardization of group-wide policies
  • Operational support for strategic projects

Types of Secondment

  • Inbound Secondment – Under an inbound secondment arrangement, an employee of a foreign company is deputed to an Indian company.
    For example: Foreign Parent Company → Employee → Indian Subsidiary
  • Outbound Secondment – Under an outbound secondment arrangement, an employee of an Indian company is deputed to a foreign group entity.
    For example: Indian Company → Employee → Overseas Affiliate

Parties Involved and Their Key Objectives

Foreign Entity – The foreign entity generally seeks to:

  • Deploy skilled personnel globally
  • Ensure implementation of group-wide policies
  • Maintain consistency in business processes
  • Support strategic business initiatives

Host Entity – The host entity aims to:

  • Access specialised expertise
  • Improve operational efficiencies
  • Facilitate knowledge transfer
  • Strengthen management capabilities

Seconded Employee – The employee typically benefits through:

  • International work exposure
  • Technical and professional development
  • Enhanced career prospects
  • Cross-cultural experience

Types of Employers in a Secondment Arrangement

A key issue in every secondment arrangement is determining whether the foreign entity continues to be the employer or whether the Indian entity assumes the role of the real (economic) employer.

The different types of employers and their respective roles and responsibilities are discussed below:

Legal Employer – The legal employer usually:

  • Retains the employment contract
  • Pays salary and benefits
  • Administers payroll
  • Maintains employment lien
  • Provides retirement and social security benefits

Economic / Real Employer – The economic employer is the entity that:

  • Exercises day-to-day supervision
  • Controls and directs work activities
  • Evaluates performance
  • Bears economic costs and risks associated with employment

Key Challenges in Cross-Border Secondment

  • Determining whether the foreign entity or the host entity is the real/economic employer of the secondee.
  • Assessing whether salary reimbursements are mere cost recoveries or consideration for services provided by the foreign entity.
  • Evaluating whether the presence and activities of secondees create a taxable PE for the foreign enterprise in India.
  • Determining whether the arrangement constitutes an employer–employee relationship or a taxable manpower supply service.
  • Ensuring compliance with visa, FRRO, social security and provident fund requirements applicable to international assignments.

Landmark Judicial Decisions

  • Director of Income Tax (International Taxation), Mumbai v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. (Supreme Court, 2007)
    The Supreme Court held that stewardship and monitoring functions alone do not result in a Permanent Establishment in India. The determination depends upon actual functions performed and control exercised over the personnel.
  • Centrica India Offshore Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax-I & Ors. (Delhi High Court, 2014)
    The Court held that salary reimbursements may constitute FTS where:
    • The foreign company retains employment lien; and
    • The secondees provide technical expertise to the Indian entity.

The judgment emphasized that substance should prevail over contractual form.

  • Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bangalore (Adjudication) & Ors. v. Northern Operating Systems Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court, 2022)
    The Supreme Court held that secondment arrangements could amount to manpower supply services where the foreign company continues to remain the actual employer and the reimbursements effectively represent consideration for provision of personnel.
    This remains one of the most significant decisions governing the GST and service tax implications of secondments.
  • M/s Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Karnataka High Court, 2022)
    The Court observed that reimbursement of salary costs does not automatically become taxable as FTS. Where the applicable treaty contains a “Make Available” clause, the transfer of technical knowledge must be specifically established.
  • Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-1, New Delhi v. Ernst & Young U.S. LLP (Delhi High Court, 2026)

In a significant recent ruling, the Delhi High Court held that reimbursements received by EY US from Indian group entities in respect of deputed employees were taxable as FTS under the India-US DTAA.

The Court observed that the foreign entity retained employment lien over the secondees and that EY methodologies, technical processes, and know-how were transferred to the Indian entities, thereby satisfying the “Make Available” requirement.

The decision reinforces the Revenue’s position that cost-to-cost reimbursement may nevertheless be taxable where technical expertise is transferred and the foreign enterprise continues to maintain substantive employment rights.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

It depends on the actual functions performed and control exercised over the employee, not just the contractual arrangement. As held by the Supreme Court in Morgan Stanley (2007), mere stewardship or monitoring activities do not create PE. However, if the foreign entity retains significant control over the seconded employee’s work, PE exposure may arise.

Not automatically. Courts have held that pure cost reimbursement isn’t inherently taxable as Fees for Technical Services (FTS). However, per Centrica (2014) and the recent Ernst & Young US LLP (2026) ruling, if the foreign company retains the employment lien and technical expertise / know-how is transferred to the Indian entity, the reimbursement can be taxed as FTS, especially where the treaty has a “Make Available” clause.

The real (economic) employer is determined by who exercises day-to-day supervision, controls work activities, evaluates performance, and bears the economic risk of employment, not simply who pays the salary or holds the contract. This distinction is central to most tax and GST disputes in this area.

Yes. The Supreme Court in Northern Operating Systems (2022) held that if the foreign company continues to be the actual employer and reimbursements effectively represent payment for supplying personnel, the arrangement can be classified as manpower supply services, attracting GST or service tax.

Ensure robust documentation, clearly define roles and responsibilities between the foreign and host entities, evaluate FTS and PE exposure under applicable treaties, and — most importantly, ensure your actual business conduct matches your contractual terms. Courts increasingly look at substance over form, so consistency between paperwork and practice is critical.