Mexico: Limitation of benefits and anti-abuse rules in Mexico’s tax agreements

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Mexico: Limitation of benefits and anti-abuse rules in Mexico’s tax agreements

cuellar.jpg

sanchez.jpg

David Cuellar


Nidia Sanchez

In recent years Mexico has signed new agreements for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion (tax treaties) which came into force during 2012 (Hungary), 2013 (Bahrain, Lithuania and Ukraine), 2014 (Colombia, Estonia, Hong Kong, Kuwait, Latvia and Qatar) and 2015 (United Arab Emirates, Malta and Peru). It is important to highlight that in these agreements Mexico negotiated the inclusion of anti-abuse rules focused on the limitation of benefits (LoB) provided that certain conditions are met.

Note that the tax treaties' provisions do not limit domestic rules regarding thin capitalisation (Ukraine) and controlled foreign corporations (Hungary, Bahrain, Estonia, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Malta and Peru) and in the specific case of Hong Kong does not limit domestic back-to-back rules.

It is worth noting that the benefits established in the tax treaties would not be granted if it is determined that the taxpayer carries activities or acquired tax residence in the other state with the sole purpose of obtaining the benefits from such agreement. In the specific case of Peru this provision is limited to tax treaty benefits related to dividends, interest and royalties (the latter in the case of Hungary, Bahrain, Lithuania, Kuwait, Qatar and Ukraine).

In some of these new tax treaties, the LoB provision establishes that the benefits would be granted if:

  • The resident is an entity whose shares are traded in a recognised stock market or the resident is property of an entity whose shares are traded in a recognised stock market;

  • More than 50% of the resident stockholding is the property of an entity or individual with the right to apply the agreement benefits;

  • Not more than 50% of the gross revenues are used for paying interest or royalties to an entity that is not entitled to the benefits of the agreement; or

  • More than 50% of the resident stockholding is the property of a state, state agencies or local authorities.

In the case of Hong Kong, when paying dividends, interest and royalties (only interest and royalties for Malta) benefits would not be granted on transactions in which 50% or more of the payments received are transferred to another entity which is not resident in any of the contracting states and which would not receive equivalent or higher treaty benefits for this revenue if the payment was received directly by virtue of an agreement signed by the other state and its residence state.

For Lithuania the benefits of the agreement are not applicable to entities or individuals totally or partially tax exempt due to a special tax regime according to the domestic laws or recurrent practices of any state.

This puts Mexico in the line for meeting with the OECD BEPS action 6 which intends to develop model treaty provisions and recommendations regarding the design of domestic rules to prevent the granting of treaty benefits in inappropriate circumstances.

David Cuellar (david.cuellar@mx.pwc.com) and Nidia Sanchez (nidia.sanchez@mx.pwc.com)

PwC

Tel: +52 (55) 5263 6693

Website: www.pwc.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Recent Indian case law emphasises the importance of economic substance over mere legal form in evaluating tax implications, say authors from Khaitan & Co
PepsiCo was represented by PwC, while the ATO was advised by MinterEllison, an Australian-headquartered law firm
Three tax experts dissect the impact of a 30% tariff that has shaken up trade relations between South Africa and the US
Awards
ITR is delighted to reveal all the shortlisted nominees for the 2025 Americas Tax Awards
As we move into an era of ‘substance over form’, determining the fundamental nature of a particular instrument is key when evaluating the tax implications of selling hybrid securities
It stands in stark contrast to a mere 1% increase in firmwide revenue since last year
It follows a court case concerning a Freedom of Information request lodged by the founder of a software company
After years of deafening silence, the UK tax authority is taking overdue action against corporates that fail to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion
The US president has raised India’s tariff rate to 50% because of its importation of Russian oil; in other news, firms made key international tax partner hires
Tax auditors themselves had not been aware of the new TP ‘transaction matrix’ requirements, ITR hears as five German partners share their client experiences
Gift this article