This study aims to understand the underlying considerations of the Tax Court decisions of PT A and PT B related to identification of existence and validity of the royalty payments on technology (know how) and trademark also the conformity of those decision with the arms length principle in the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines. This study also purpose to determine whether the distributor company could treated the royalty payment on technology (know how) and trademark as deductible expenses. This research uses a qualitative approach with descriptive research type. The results of this study conclude that the difference on tax court decision of PT A and PT B related to royalty payment technology (know how) and trademarks is due to: (1) the results of identification on existence and validity of royalty payments through examination on legal agreements, (2) proof of the substance and economic benefits on utilization of intangible property, and (3) proof that there is no double taxation imposed on the payment of compensation for the utilization of intangible property. The implementation procedures for the arm's length principle also have been made in accordance with OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines in order to resolve transfer pricing disputes.