Mexico: Tax authorities' new guidance on permanent establishment
International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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 & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The reported warning follows EY accumulating extra debt to deal with the costs of its failed Project Everest
Law firms that pay close attention to their client relationships are more likely to win repeat work, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
Paul Griggs, the firm’s inbound US senior partner, will reverse a move by the incumbent leader; in other news, RSM has announced its new CEO
The EMEA research period is open until May 31
Luis Coronado suggests companies should embrace technology to assist with TP data reporting, as the ‘big four’ firm unveils a TP survey of over 1,000 professionals
The proposed matrix will help revenue officers track intra-company transactions from multinationals
The full list of finalists has been revealed and the winners will be presented on June 20 at the Metropolitan Club in New York
The ‘big four’ firm has threatened to legally pursue those behind the letter, which has been circulating on social media
The guidelines have been established in the wake of multiple tax scandals and controversies that have rocked the accounting profession
KPMG Netherlands’ former head of assurance also received a permanent bar and $150,000 fine; in other news, asset management firm BlackRock lost a $13.5bn UK tax appeal
Gift this article