Talk:Arm's length principle

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Taxation (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles

Arm's length principle most central to transfer pricing and tax. Arms length transfer pricing with a distinction to be made between business and taxation transfer price. Acknowledge that under the Arms length principle companies will often develop two prices. One to motivate managers and one to satisfy government? --Roberth23 22:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is written in British English and does not represent a world view. "Labour laws" in the United States when it comes to firings are normally handled by "Employment at will," which gives fired employees little legal recourse if fired for a non-discriminatory reason. I suggest that this be edited and a better example be used to illustrate arm's length transactions, hopefully, one with a broader legal basis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.59.54 (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Normally"? Only in "right-to-work" states. GeorgeTSLC (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Problem[edit]

There are three sources cited at the end of the article, probably all making very much the same points. Do Wikipedia principles actually insist that each statement in the article have one, two, or three of these sources attached as footnotes? GeorgeTSLC (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]