Disparity between the US and Brazil’s approach to royalties increases risk of double taxation

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

Disparity between the US and Brazil’s approach to royalties increases risk of double taxation

As a result of Brazil’s unique policy to prevent erosion of the tax base, companies often face double taxation.

The pending case before the US Tax Court (Docket 5816-13), 3M Co. et al. v. Commissioner, brings this issue into the spotlight. In this case the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) claims that 3M should be charging higher royalties for the trademark. 3M claims that it is bound by Brazilian legal requirements. The IRS argues that the amount charged is not at arm’s-length, because there should be a 6% royalty rate over the net sales of manufactured products.

In Brazil, outbound royalty payments are not subject to transfer pricing rules. Instead, there are fixed limits for deductibility and remittance requirements that must be observed. First, all the contracts must be submitted for analysis by the National Industrial Property Institute (INPI) and be registered with the Brazilian Central Bank.

Second, royalties related to the use of patents of invention, manufacturing formulas or processes, and expenses for technical, scientific, administrative or similar assistance are, in most cases, limited to 5% of the net revenue from the sale of products covered by the licence agreement or service provision agreement, but for some of them the limitation is lower, depending on the company’s activity.

Royalties for the use of brands (industrial or trademarks) pertaining to any type of production or activity, when not involving use of a patent, manufacturing formula or process, are limited to 1% of the same revenue.

Technical, scientific, administrative and related fees are also subject to the same requirements for deductibility and remittance of royalties, except for the fact that they can only be deducted in the first five years of the company’s establishment or the application process. Deductions can be, renewed for another five years if it is proved to be necessary.

Brazil and the US do not have a double tax treaty or any alternative dispute resolution mechanism so the outcome of the 3M Case is very important for planning and tax compliance purposes for companies investing in Brazil.

By André Gomes de Oliveira (andre.oliveira@cbsg.com.br) and Francisco Lisboa Moreira (Francisco.moreira@cbsg.com.br)

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

A new transatlantic firm under the name of Winston Taylor is expected to go live in May 2026 with more than 1,400 lawyers and 20 offices
As ITR’s exclusive data uncovers in-house dissatisfaction with case management, advisers cite Italy’s arcane tax rules
The new guidance is not meant to reflect a substantial change to UK law, but the requirement that tax advice is ‘likely to be correct’ imposes unrealistic expectations
Taylor Wessing, whose most recent UK revenues were £283.7m, would become part of a £1.23bn firm post combination
China and a clutch of EU nations have voiced dissent after Estonia shot down the US side-by-side deal; in other news, HMRC has awarded companies contracts to help close the tax gap
An EY survey of almost 2,000 tax leaders also found that only 49% of respondents feel ‘highly prepared’ to manage an anticipated surge of disputes
The international tax, audit and assurance firm recorded a 4% year-on-year increase in overall turnover to hit $11bn
Awards
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
CIT as a proportion of total tax revenue varied considerably across OECD countries, the report also found, with France at 6% and Ireland at 21.5%
Erdem & Erdem’s tax partner tells ITR about female leader inspirations, keeping ahead of the curve, and what makes tax cool
Gift this article