Tools
A transfer pricing tool that produces numbers, not documents
Most transfer pricing software stores policy documents without ever calculating a charge. These three tools do the arithmetic instead: intercompany charges and reconciliation, arm's-length loan rates, and cash pool leg pricing, each built from your own ledger data so every figure can be traced and defended on review.
The distinction matters more than it sounds. A documentation platform describes the method your group has chosen; it does not tell you what to invoice this month, what rate to apply to a new facility, or why an intercompany balance will not clear. That calculation work is what still lands on finance every period.
IC Tool
Intercompany charges, invoices and reconciliation
Calculates intercompany charges from your own cost base and allocation keys, then produces the invoices, entity-level impact and reconciliation behind them. Six modules cover cost allocation, hourly rates, VAT position, entity impact and matching, so every posted figure traces back to a documented policy.
Explore IC ToolInterest Rate Setting Tool
Arm's length rates for intercompany loans
Builds an arm's-length rate for each intercompany loan from the borrower's standalone credit profile rather than the parent's funding cost. Credit assessment, comparable selection and rate build-up are captured in one file, giving you a rate and the evidence pack that supports it years later.
Explore Interest Rate Setting ToolCash Pool Pricing Tool
Leg-by-leg pricing for physical and notional pools
Prices every participant leg in a physical or notional cash pool as its own controlled transaction. It characterises the pool leader, sets deposit and borrowing rates per participant, allocates the pooling benefit and flags balances that never reverse and so look more like term funding.
Explore Cash Pool Pricing ToolCompare
Which tool covers which transaction
The three tools do not overlap. Each one prices a different category of controlled transaction, takes different inputs and produces a different deliverable. The table below is the fastest way to see where your group's intercompany flows land before you look at any single tool in detail.
| Tool | Transaction covered | Inputs | Outputs | Cadence | Typical owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC Tool | Services, cost recharges, royalties, management fees | GL extract, cost centres, headcount and driver data, TP policy | Charge per entity, invoices, VAT position, reconciliation, journals | Every close | Group finance / controlling |
| Interest Rate Setting Tool | Intercompany loans, guarantees, shareholder debt | Borrower financials, facility terms, currency, tenor, seniority | Credit rating, comparable set, interquartile range, median rate | Per facility, refreshed annually | Tax / treasury |
| Cash Pool Pricing Tool | Physical and notional cash pools, participant legs | Daily balances per participant, pool terms, leader functions | Deposit and borrowing rate per leg, benefit split, leader fee | Annual, with in-year refreshes | Treasury / tax |
How to choose
Start from the transaction, not the tool
- Charging costs or services between entities, or closing intercompany balances — start with the IC Tool
- Pricing a loan, a guarantee or shareholder debt — start with the Interest Rate Setting Tool
- Running a physical or notional pool with several participants — start with the Cash Pool Pricing Tool
- Financing plus operational flows in the same group — the tools share inputs and are usually run together
Why calculation-first
What you get that documentation software will not give you
- Every output is a calculated number, not a policy paragraph describing one
- Inputs come from your own ledger, so figures reconcile to the accounts you file
- The method, driver and comparable behind each figure stay attached to it
- Models rerun in minutes when entities, rates or cost bases change mid-year
- Documentation is produced alongside the calculation rather than months later
Go deeper
Related reading and reference material
If you are still scoping the problem rather than choosing a tool, these pages cover the wider category, the vendor landscape and the terminology that comes up in transfer pricing conversations with advisers and tax authorities.
See the tools run against your own intercompany data
A short call is usually enough to tell whether these tools fit your group. We walk through your current cost base, financing arrangements and close process, show the calculations running on comparable data, and set out honestly where automation helps and where a spreadsheet is still the right answer.
Frequently asked
Transfer pricing tool FAQ
What is a transfer pricing tool?+
A transfer pricing tool calculates the price of a transaction between related entities and produces the evidence that the price is arm's length. In practice that means turning ledger data, policy rules and market comparables into a specific charge or rate, together with the working that supports it if a tax authority later asks.
How is this different from transfer pricing software?+
Most products sold as transfer pricing software are documentation platforms: they store local files, master files and country-by-country reports, but they do not compute the charge. These tools sit upstream and produce the numbers those documents describe, which is the part most finance teams are still doing in spreadsheets.
Which tool do I need?+
It depends on the transaction. Operational flows such as services, recharges and management fees run through the IC Tool. Loans, guarantees and shareholder debt need the Interest Rate Setting Tool. Cash pools need leg-by-leg pricing. Groups with both financing and operational flows typically run more than one.
Do we need to replace our ERP or existing software?+
No. The tools run off general ledger extracts from NetSuite, SAP, Xero and comparable systems, so nothing has to be ripped out and no IT project is needed to start. Outputs come back in a posting-ready format your accounting system can ingest, and existing documentation platforms carry on as they are.
Is a spreadsheet good enough instead?+
For a single entity with one or two flows, often yes, and we will say so. The case for tooling appears when the model has to be rerun every close, when entities and drivers keep changing, and when the person who built the original spreadsheet has left. That is when version control quietly becomes the real risk.
Are the outputs audit-ready?+
Yes. Each calculation carries its inputs, method, driver or comparable set, and calculation steps, so a reviewer can trace any figure back to the ledger line or market data behind it. The documentation is generated with the numbers rather than reconstructed afterwards, which is usually where audit trails break down.