Subcontracting arrangements under heavy scrutiny from Mexican tax authorities

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

Subcontracting arrangements under heavy scrutiny from Mexican tax authorities

LOGO RITCH MUELLER 320 x 215

New rules published for 2017 aimed at tightening compliance requirements may not only cover personnel outsourcing by corporate groups, but might also apply to all subcontracted services.

rm200.jpg

It has been common practice for groups operating in Mexico to subcontract all personnel in order to mitigate the impact of mandatory employee profit sharing and labour risks. This has generally been done by either setting up an intragroup service company that houses the group’s employees and renders services to the other group companies, or by subcontracting third parties that render services with their own employees. 

Service companies recognise as taxable income the service fee received from the contractor, which covers the cost of labour plus a mark-up, and are able to deduct their payroll. Additionally, service companies should shift a 16% VAT on such fees to the contractor. In turn, the contractor is generally able to deduct the service fee for income tax purposes and credit the 16% VAT paid on such services.

Several tax precedents emerged during 2016 when the Mexican tax authorities intended to reject the deduction of the service fee paid by the contractor, or disallow the corresponding VAT credit, by making an assessment of the nature of the contractor/subcontractor relation based on the provisions of the Federal Labour Law. Tax and federal courts upheld opposing positions and divergent approaches to reach their conclusions, which generated a great deal of uncertainty for the contractors, which in a couple of cases were deemed employers of the service companies’ employees for tax purposes.

The tax authorities issued new rules for 2017 in order to clarify their position and strengthen the requirements for contractors to be able to deduct for income tax purposes the service fees paid to subcontractors, and claim the corresponding VAT credit. The reform included several amendments to the Mexican Income Tax Law, Value Added Tax Law and Miscellaneous Tax Rules.

In general terms, the recent changes require the contractor to obtain certain information on the payments made by the subcontractor to its employees, including copies of payment slips and timesheets associated to the services provided to them, and regarding actual payment of the VAT to be submitted by the subcontractor to the tax authorities. Non-compliant contractors would not be able to deduct the service fees for income tax purposes and/or claim the corresponding VAT credit.

It is worth noting that the new requirements included in the tax laws refer in general to subcontracting arrangements regulated under the Federal Labour Law, without making any distinction among different types of service agreements. As a result, it could be interpreted that the new legislation covers all types of service agreements, even if not related to the outsourcing of personnel.  

The above conclusion is very sensitive because if contractors make a distinction between personnel outsourcing contracts and other subcontracted services they may weaken their employee profit sharing planning.   

Contractors must meet the new requirements as of January 2017. However, the tax authorities granted an extension that allows them to meet such requirements by July 2017, regarding services subcontracted from January through to June 2017.   

Taxpayers must carefully review the documentation supporting their subcontracting arrangements from a tax and labour perspective to determine their tax position regarding the new requirements included for 2017 and, if deemed necessary, obtain all applicable documentation in order to submit it to the tax authorities by July 2017 to avoid risking the deduction of the service fees for income tax purposes and the corresponding VAT credit.

It is also recommendable to evaluate if a ruling should be requested from the tax authorities in order to confirm which specific service contracts should be excluded from the new reporting obligations (e.g. auditors, advisers, time charters, brokerage agreements, freights, to mention a few).

This article was written by Oscar A. López Velarde and Santiago Díaz Rivera Bravo of Ritch, Mueller, Heather y Nicolau, S.C.

Oscar A. López Velarde (olopezvelarde@ritch.com.mx)

Santiago Díaz Rivera Bravo (sdiazrivera@ritch.com.mx)

Ritch, Mueller, Heather y Nicolau, S.C.

www.ritch.com.mx



more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article