Mexico: Tax authorities' new guidance on permanent establishment

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Mexico: Tax authorities' new guidance on permanent establishment

cuellar-david.jpg

montemayor-blas.jpg

David Cuellar and Blas Montemayor, PwC

Early in April and July 2013, the Mexican tax authorities published new internal criteria regarding some aspects of the Mexican federal tax legislation, including international tax matters. These criteria are intended to help clarify the interpretation of the Mexican tax provisions, which are rather complex and also to make clear the position of the Mexican tax authorities with respect to specific tax issues.

In this regard, one of the above mentioned criterions dealing with international matters provides the tax authorities' view on how to read the permanent establishment (PE) definition under domestic law.

Under the Mexican income tax law (MITL) the general definition of the term PE is any place of business in which business activities are partially or totally carried out or independent personal services are rendered. For these purposes, the MITL provides a non-exhaustive list of examples of places that may be considered a PE, including branches, agencies, offices, factories, workshops, installations, mines, quarries or any place of exploration, mining or exploitation of nature resources.

According to the tax authorities' new internal criteria, the list of non-exhaustive PE examples should not be read in an isolated basis but rather such examples should be read in light of the definition of a PE (a place in which business activities are carried out or services are rendered).

For instance, a foreign resident that has an office in Mexico would be able to conclude if such office triggers a PE in this country only after analysing whether or not in such office business activities are conducted or services are rendered. As noted, although the presence of a foreign resident may frequently raise a red flag for tax purposes; the mere fact of having an office in Mexico cannot be conclusive as to whether or not a PE is triggered. To arrive at a conclusion on potential PE risk in Mexico, the specific facts and circumstances should be analysed in light of the Mexican tax provisions and the tax treaties signed by Mexico and the relevant OECD commentaries, when applicable.

Although the Mexican tax authorities' criteria is not mandatory and it does not have the weight of the Mexican tax law (since such criteria is not approved by the Mexican Congress), it provides a realistic guidance for taxpayers when determining the existence of a Mexican PE, which is a very complex topic that should be carefully analysed by foreign multinationals that have or are planning to have presence in Mexico.

David Cuellar (david.cuellar@mx.pwc.com) and Blas Montemayor (blas.montemayor@us.pwc.com)

PwC

Tel: +52 55 5263 5816

Fax: +52 55 5263 6010

Website: www.pwc.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

A 120-plus-day delay to refunds would cost taxpayers almost $3bn in additional interest, the Cato Institute warned; plus indirect tax updates from February
The Office for Budget Responsibility’s pessimistic pillar two forecast accompanied the UK chancellor’s muted Spring Statement, dubbed ‘as dull as possible’ by one adviser
Digital tax reform is dissolving the old ‘temporal buffer’, forcing systems, institutions, and professionals to adapt as real-time reporting reshapes governance, capability, and compliance
Our first instalment features analysis of Deloitte’s landmark EMEA merger, Donald Trump’s Supreme Court tariff showdown and Venezuela’s tax evolution
While some believe it could have a positive effect on the wider advisory landscape, others argue that HMRC’s ‘red tape’ exercise won’t deter bad actors
The political optics of the US’s carve-out deal are poor, but as the Fair Tax Foundation’s Paul Monaghan writes, it preserves pillar two’s guiding ethos
The big four firm reportedly sent ‘threatening’ correspondence to Unity Advisory over its hiring of ex-PwC partners; plus tax recruitment news from the week
Tom Goldstein, who was represented by US law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson, denied wilfully cheating on his taxes and blamed errors on his staff
Multinationals face rising TP scrutiny as global rules diverge. As Daniel Moalusi argues, strong, consistent documentation is now essential to minimise audit risk and protect tax positions
The profession is fundamentally restructuring itself around what tax and accounting work should be, a Thomson Reuters leader told ITR
Gift this article