International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Latin American transfer pricing post-BEPS

The OECD’s BEPS project, coupled with other international transfer pricing developments, has meant sweeping changes for the region. Silvana Blanco, Bruno Urrieta Farías, Federico Paz, Horacio Dinice, Byron Martinez, Rosemari Cordero, Gloria Guevara, Alejandra Barrancos, Joseph Soto and Iliana Salcedo of Deloitte discuss what this means for Latin America.

Latin American countries are paying close attention to BEPS, leading to changes in their local regulations or approaches to audits related to transfer pricing. It is clear that MNEs should be prepared to face more scrutiny regarding transfer pricing throughout the region. In turn, the tax authorities are in most countries increasing their documentation requirements as well as the number of audits they are conducting.

Based on the above, companies will need to react quickly to this new environment by establishing a specific strategy for the region. To achieve that goal, regional documentation from a centralised perspective and consistency with global policies will be crucial.

This article aims to highlight the most relevant aspects of each country and remark the recent key developments affecting those doing business in each Latin American jurisdiction. Topics include base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) developments, exchange of information and transfer pricing updates.


In recent years, the OECD has been developing several initiatives to avoid aggressive tax planning with the objective of achieving double non-taxation or shifting income to non-cooperative jurisdictions.

In this context, on June 7 2017, Argentina signed the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (MLI). The MLI will strengthen provisions to resolve treaty disputes, including through mandatory binding arbitration, thereby reducing double taxation and increasing tax certainty.

With the MLI, the OECD embodied the BEPS principles that can be automatically applied, under certain conditions, to the bilateral tax treaties that have been executed by the different signing countries among themselves.

The MLI provides a system to implement the recommendations that arose from the BEPS project in relation to the previously signed treaties. The MLI emphasises matters such as hybrid instruments, tax abuse, permanent establishment status evasion and improvement in conflict resolution and arbitrage mechanisms.

The MLI represents a major progress in the international context of abusive tax-planning prevention. Nonetheless, it is up to each jurisdiction to analyse in a cautious fashion every single case to precipitously avoid each anti-evasion measure or deny arbitrarily relevant tax benefits.

The method to be put in force by the signing parties, and the possibility to determine between different forms of rules over other forms, for example regarding treaty abuse, is an original theme set forth in the MLI.

It should be pointed out that the MLI represents a paradigm shift with respect to previous treaties, since it allows modifying existing treaties without the need to initiate bilateral negotiations with each of the counterparts, implementing almost immediately the BEPS directives in Argentina's treaty network. In addition, the BEPS agenda will remain a priority during the Argentine presidency of the G20 in 2018.

In line with the above, tax avoidance involving tax treaties has received attention in Argentina. In 2011, an Argentine government commission reviewed the country's tax treaty network to determine whether there was potential for abuse. The following year, Argentina unilaterally terminated its tax treaties with Switzerland, Spain and Chile, mainly to eliminate the Argentine wealth tax exemption and to address perceived potential for abuse regarding withholding taxes on royalties, inappropriate use of conduit companies and other areas, depending on the treaty.

Argentina recently signed new treaties with the following countries:

  • Spain (in force retroactively as of January 1 2013);

  • Switzerland (in force as of January 1 2015 for withholding taxes and January 1 2016 for other articles and Article 25);

  • Chile (in force as of January 1 2017);

  • Mexico (in force as of January 1 2018).

In addition, on July 21 2017, authorities from Argentina and Brazil signed the Amendment Protocol to the Treaty to Avoid Double Taxation and Avoid Tax Evasion regarding taxation over income.

Most of the treaties signed by Argentina follow the model proposed by the OECD. In the case of Brazil, the treaty was a combination of different models, adjusted to each country's needs.

In addition to eliminating the potential for abuse, these treaties incorporate the current international standards on the automatic exchange of tax information.

From another perspective, it is worth pointing out that multinationals in Argentina have faced increasing audit activity from the tax authorities regarding international transactions. The local tax authority, AFIP, focuses on specific industries. Transfer pricing and thin capitalisation transactions have attracted particular scrutiny.

Argentine tax authorities are becoming more interested in and have been challenging transactions and structures based on the principle of substance over form. This principle is included in Argentina's Tax Procedural Act, and the Argentine tax authorities apply it broadly to disregard legal forms which are not in sync with the intention of the parties involved in a given transaction.

Given the Argentine tax authorities' focus on substance over form, foreign companies doing business in the country should make sure to have a sound, well-documented business purpose for their business structures and transactions. In many tax disputes ruled by the Supreme Court, taxpayers have received favorable sentences when they were able to demonstrate the business soundness and substance of their transactions.

As a final point, the tax authorities have stated publicly that they are considering enacting legislation implementing country-by-country (CbC) reporting. The legislation is expected to adopt the master file requirement. Current legislation already requires the filing of the local file on a yearly basis. No effective date has been announced, but more regulatory requirements and exchange of information regimes are to be expected in the future.


The draft decree published by the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit on August 11 2017 is intended to modify the articles of Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Title 2 of Part 2 and Chapter 1 of Title 3 of Part 6 of Book 1 of the Single Regulatory Decree on Tax Matters, derived from the amendments introduced by Law 1819/2016 to the TP regime.

The main changes established in the draft regulatory decree are the following:

New limits (amounts) to TP documentation

The local report and the master file must be prepared and submitted for those types of operations – intercompany transactions with foreign related parties and/or located in a free trade zone within the Colombian territory, or individuals or entities in tax havens – for which the annual amount is equal to or greater than 45,000 UVT ($450,000) of the taxable year subject to documentation. It applies, as long as the taxpayer's total assets or gross income exceeds the minimum amount of 100,000 UVT or 61,000 UVT, respectively. In addition, for those transactions carried out with persons, entities or companies located, resident or domiciled in non-cooperating jurisdictions of low or zero taxation or preferential tax regimes, the local report and the master file should be prepared and submitted for those types of transactions for which the annual cumulative amount is equal to or greater than 10,000 UVT of the taxable year subject to documentation, regardless of the amount of the total assets or gross income of the taxpayer. The transactions that were considered as non-deductible for income tax purposes and modified the results of the income statement should not be analysed, but must be mentioned as part of the taxpayer's TP documentation.

Master file – preparation and submission

The obligation to prepare and submit the master file starts for the fiscal year 2017 for those taxpayers of income tax and complementary taxes that exceed the limits mentioned above.

The draft decree includes – for analysis and comments of third parties – a detailed list of the suggested information to prepare the master file. It should incorporate a global vision of the multinational group including its organisational structure, business description, intangibles, financial activities, and financial and tax positions.

CbC report – preparation and submission

For this obligation, which applies for the fiscal year 2016, the draft decree includes a detailed description of the information that the CbC report must contain in order to comply with the assumptions indicated in Article 2 of 260-5 of the Colombian Tax Statute. In general terms, it must contain the following information for each of the jurisdictions in which the multinational group operates: consolidated revenues, profit or loss before income taxes, income tax paid and accrued, stated capital, accumulated earnings, number of employees and tangible assets other than cash and cash equivalents.

Commodities – TP analysis

The decree for discussion states that the comparable uncontrolled price method should be applied to determine the arm's-length condition of the transactions related with commodities. In this sense, the dates and/or specific periods agreed by the parties for the determination of the price of the commodities must be demonstrated by reliable documents, supporting that they were consistent with what would have been agreed by independent parties in comparable circumstances, and registered in the electronic means developed by the Colombian tax authority.

Finally, it is important to mention that the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit established August 25 2017 as the deadline for comments and/or observations to the Draft Regulatory Decree.

Costa Rica

With the publication of the ruling DGT-R-16-2017, Costa Rica introduced important changes to its TP rules. The local file must now include more detailed information than before, aligned with the requirements of the OECD's BEPS Action 13. Costa Rica has also introduced the obligation of the master file, beginning the fiscal year of 2017. The master file must be delivered to the tax administration upon request and the content of the report is the same as established in BEPS Action 13. No CbC rules have been discussed or implemented yet.

In addition, Costa Rica's tax administration has suspended the transfer pricing informative return filing until further notice.


Under the transfer pricing regime in Ecuador, the advanced transfer pricing assessment (ATPA) is applicable. In this regard, the Ecuadorian tax code establishes that income tax payers who have performed transactions with their related parties and who are subject to the transfer pricing regime must file an ATPA with the tax authority with respect to the valuation of transactions performed between them and their related parties. These are the requirements:

  • General information of the taxpayer submitting the ATPA, as well as details of the transactions to be valued under the ATPA.

  • Information on the related parties and the agreements that the tested party has signed with them.

  • Preliminary valuation of the transactions and methodology according to the arm's-length principle under Ecuadorian tax regulations.

  • Relevant assumptions: The taxpayer should indicate the relevant information used, referring to the facts or circumstances that affected or could affect the economic valuation of the transactions included in the ATPA.

The tax authority may request at any time that the taxpayer as well as third parties provide any additional information which may be considered necessary, for instance reports, background and justifications related to the proposal, as well as additional explanations or clarifications about the proposal.

Within two years from the date of submitting the ATPA, the tax authority will issue a resolution either accepting or rejecting the assessment performed by the taxpayer. If the resolution is approved the taxpayer may apply it for three years.

If the ATPA is approved by the Internal Revenue Services, taxpayers are not required to file a transfer pricing report and appendices with respect to transactions covered by the ATPA for three years.

Within two months of the effective date of the income tax report for each period in which the resolution is valid, taxpayers must submit a report related to compliance with the conditions included in the ATPA. The report must include the following:

  • Operations carried out in the tax period to which the methodology has been applied.

  • Prices, amounts of compensations, or profit margins of such operations as a consequence of applying the methodology.

  • Description of the behavior of the circumstances referred by the critical assumptions established in the methodology and justification of compliance with such assumptions.

  • Description of the application of the methodology to the results of the fiscal year.


The new Honduras tax code introduced small changes to the country's TP rules, with the most important discussing transactions subject to analysis. Transactions between local related parties are no longer required to be reviewed, unless one of the related parties is part of a free trade zone or any other tax benefit regime.

In general terms, TP rules in Honduras are based on the OECD guidelines and methods, and so far, no rules for CbC reports or master files have been discussed or implemented.


According to Law 822, TP rules are applicable as of June 30 2017. Nicaragua's TP rules are based on the OECD guidelines and methods. No TP law has been published yet, but important topics such as materiality, arm's-length range and comparable year data are waiting to be clarified by the tax administration. Nevertheless, the first year of application of the TP rules is still fiscal year 2017.

Also beginning fiscal year 2017, the master file can be requested by the tax administration. Local requirements for the master file are limited in scope, but a report based on the OECD's BEPS Action 13 can be made and delivered to the tax administration upon request. No CbC rules have been discussed or implemented yet.

El Salvador

There have not been any changes to the current TP regulations since the last reforms in 2014. In the last fiscal year, the tax administration promoted a draft reform of the tax code, but to date, it has not been approved, and not many believe that the TP regulations will be reformed in the short term.

During the last year, the tax administration has increased its auditing processes in transfer pricing, evaluating in detail the support documentation for intercompany transactions (TP report) and focusing on the materialisation of services. The audit procedures are mainly focused on the largest taxpayers, regardless of industry.

Regarding the new OECD guidelines and the OECD's BEPS project, the tax administration has not announced any draft reform to the tax code that includes such recommendations. To date, there are no new guidelines and/or documentation requirements on TP issues. Neither has the tax administration given notice on the implementation of the CbC report.

Although our local legislation makes a link to the OECD guidelines, it will be important for the tax administration to inform taxpayers if this link is absolute to all requirements set out in the new guidelines or which of these new provisions will be adopted for the practice of transfer pricing in the local territory; considering that El Salvador, to date, is not a member country of the OECD.


Most recent developments in Guatemala in the transfer pricing area revolve around transfer pricing documentation, information and TP audits.

In late 2016, the tax administration, SAT, published its Transfer Pricing Technical Guide in order to standardise the content and analysis of the TP report. This guide is completely aligned with the OECD's BEPS Action 13.

In early 2017, the SAT modified the transfer pricing informative return that taxpayers need to file jointly with their income tax return. The high level and depth of the information required made it necessary for taxpayers to actually have the 2016 transfer pricing study completed at hand. This behaviour by the SAT implies the need to have the TP studies completed no later than March 31 of each subsequent year.

In 2016, the SAT started TP audits with respect to the 2013 fiscal year. The more significant assessments made by the tax authority were in respect to transactions of trade of commodities where the SAT is objecting import and export related prices on a transaction-by-transaction basis rather than accepting a global analysis based on an arm's-length range for the fiscal year, and also the use of comparable companies reporting losses. Taxpayers are now discussing these assessments and they are expected to escalate to judiciary instances.


In October 2016, Panama announced it was incorporating the OECD's BEPS rules, and has started to make some changes to TP documentation.

Executive Decree No. 390 was enacted, which modifies the regulation of the arm's-length principle, effective as of January 1 2017. Among the most relevant changes, we can highlight the following.

It is ratified that transactions with related parties must be analysed one transaction at a time and according to the valuation methods established in article 762-F of the tax code. On this point, two or more transactions may be grouped for the purpose of their analysis, when they are cohesive from an economic point of view or one is a continuation of the other, making it impossible to separate them.

It is emphasised that the use of financial information from multiple periods can only be used when it adds value to the TP analysis. Furthermore, it states that multi-year data of relevant economic cycle information and the life cycle of comparable products can be used when these facts and circumstances improve reliability.

It is noted from its wording that it is not yet clear whether the taxpayer can use the financial information from multiple years for its economic analysis. During transfer pricing audits the local tax authority pointed out that the only period to be used is the one that coincides with the taxable income, alleging that with this procedure it will be clear to which period a possible transfer pricing adjustment will apply.

It is emphasised that comparable Panamanian companies will have priority over comparable international ones. The information available on comparable companies located in other countries may be used, provided it complies with the comparable analysis established in the tax code and its regulations. For this purpose, the taxpayer must justify its selection, as well as its search efforts for potentially comparable companies, the date and their source.

The information and documentation requirements of the TP study are increased to the extent that they are economically relevant with respect to the facts and circumstances of the transactions.

On this matter, the new requirements are aligned with the documentation requested in audits, which is reflected in this decree.

Additional requirements related to article 762-F of the tax code on corporate group information and documentation have been incorporated for the purpose of promoting analysis sufficiency, insofar as they are economically relevant.

It is important to mention that these transfer pricing studies for the 2016 period must comply with the new requirements set forth in this decree.

Another issue of great significance is the transfer pricing audits for those taxpayers operating from the Colon free trade zone. On July 29 2015, the Ministry of Economy and Finances' tax director stated on his Twitter account: "Transfer pricing rules apply, even if they are only relevant for the calculation of CAIR – Alternative Minimum Tax Calculation. There is already a precedent."

With regards to the aforementioned, the tax authority has provided a new definition to the taxpayers subject to this regime, based on the argument that the complementary tax, which represents an advance of the dividend tax, is combined with the income tax, in order to determine taxable income for both the taxpayer and the shareholder.

For the tax authority, there is no need to amend the tax code because the standard is very clear. Consequently, TP rules will still apply for taxpayers who exclusively execute foreign operations within a special tax regime and only generate income exempt from income tax.


As expected, Peruvian TP Rules were modified starting 2017 in order to align them with the OECD's standards and recommendations. Part of the OECD's BEPS project recommendations were also introduced. The changes are related to the so-called 'sixth method', intragroup services, the inclusion of 'other methods' and the implementation of new formal obligations related to OECD's BEPS Action 13.

One of the main changes is the introduction of the section related to intragroup services. The deduction of costs or expenses for services has been conditioned to the compliance of the benefit test and to the disclosure of certain documentation and information to Peruvian tax authorities. According to the new legislation, the benefit test would be fulfilled when the service rendered provides economical or commercial value to the service recipient, improving or maintaining its commercial position. The deduction of costs or expenses for the service received will be determined on the basis of the addition of the costs and expenses incurred by the service provider as well as its profit margin.

The intragroup services rules also include the characterisation of the 'low-value added' services, for which the margin may not exceed 5% of the costs and expenses incurred by the provider. According to the law, 'low value added' services would be those that comply with the following conditions: (i) have support nature; (ii) are not the core business of the group; (iii) do not need the use nor the creation of unique and valuable intangibles assets; and (iv) do not imply the assumption of significant risks by the service provider.

As for the documentation that tax authorities may require, the new rules state that it must demonstrate the effective provision of the service, the nature of the service, the need for the service, the costs and expenses incurred by the provider and the reasonable criteria for its allocation.

The 'sixth method' was also modified in order to align it with the commodities' transactions section of the BEPS plan. However, there are important differences between the OECD recommendations and our legislation, which establishes that the comparable uncontrolled price method is the most appropriate one in order to evaluate the import and export of commodities. The main difference lies in the 'pricing date' for the commodity. While Peruvian TP rules state that the market value in such transactions would be based on the international quotation price of such commodity on the shipment date, OECD recommendations propose a more flexible approach in relation to the 'pricing date' criteria. However, in order for this method to be applicable, complimentary rules should be published in order to define the type of goods included, the market from which the quote is obtained, the quotation to be considered of that market and adjustments that would be accepted to reflect the characteristics of the good and the type of operation.

The possibility of using other methods was also introduced when the application of the methods already allowed is not appropriate due to the nature and characteristics of the activities and transactions under analysis. It is expected that the regulations necessary to apply the law specify those transactions that may be subject to new methodologies and confirm that such 'other methods' would be mainly related to valuation techniques commonly used for the transfer of intangibles.

Finally, new formal obligations were introduced, in line with OECD's BEPS Action 13 (documentation requirements). Taxpayers will be subject to the scope of application of such obligations as follows:

  • Local file affidavit. For taxpayers with annual accrued income exceeding 2,300 tax units ($2.8 million), in respect to transactions that generate taxed income and or deductible costs or expenses. This obligation is the one that replaces the former obligations, which were TP technical report and TP informative affidavit.

  • Master file affidavit. For taxpayers that are part of a group whose accrued income exceeds 20,000 tax units ($24.7 million).

  • CbC report affidavit. For taxpayers that belong to a multinational group. The presentation of the local report affidavit is effective from 2017 (referred to intercompany transactions performed in 2016), while the presentation of the master report affidavit and the CbC affidavit will become effective from 2018. Although all of these changes are already in force, we are still expecting the complimentary regulations to be published, in order to clarify doubts regarding the filing of the master file and CbC report affidavits, and also regarding the content and template of the local file as well as the deadlines for the filing of such affidavits this year.


The Tax Transparency Act (Act 19.484) was approved in January 2017. Regarding TP issues, most relevant aspects of the law are the following. The tax authority is entitled to adapt TP requirements to the standard of OECD's BEPS Action 13 (local file, master file and CbC report).

The requirement of the CbC report will be in force for the fiscal year starting after January 1 2017. Local companies of multinational groups must file the report in Uruguay unless such report is filed in a country with which Uruguay could exchange the report. In such case, the Uruguayan entity will be subject to notification requirements.

With reference to the master file, the tax authority has not yet defined the scope of the requirement.

The tax authority is now allowed to issue multilateral advance pricing agreements. Since the first adoption of TP rules in Uruguay, unilateral APAs were permitted, however, not many taxpayers have been interested in the procedure and just a few ended up reaching an agreement with the tax authority.

In line with the above, the tax authority has reformulated the TP form that is filed together with the TP report by those entities subject to filing requirements. The new version requires very detailed information, not only on the transactions but also on the functional and economic analysis.


On July 10, the OECD released the 2017 edition of the Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations. The TP guidelines provide guidance on the application of the arm's-length principle and serve as a framework for the consideration of all transfer prices between associated enterprises.

The last edition of the transfer pricing guidelines was released in 2010. The guidelines were amended in 2016 to reflect updates stemming from the 2015 BEPS project. The 2017 transfer pricing guidelines incorporate the BEPS framework.

The above-mentioned guidelines have not been formally incorporated into the Venezuelan legislation, however, considering that said legislation (Income Tax Law Article 113) establishes that for everything not considered in said law, TP guides for multinational companies and fiscal administrations approved by the OECD will be applicable and become part of the TP regime of Venezuelan legislation.

Silvana Blanco


Deloitte Argentina

Florida 234, Floor 5th

Ciudad Autonoma de Buenos

Buenos Aires C1005AAF

Tel: +54 11 4320 4046

Silvana Blanco is a partner in the transfer pricing service team of Deloitte Argentina. She has been working at the transfer pricing department since its inception. From the beginning of the application of transfer pricing standards in Argentina, Silvana has engaged actively with the administration officers.

She has more than 19 years of experience in the application of tax, economic and financial criteria in transfer pricing, valuation analysis of intangibles, planning, business model optimisation, structuring and economic consulting. In the context of her expertise, Silvana has experience in fields such as the coordination of multi-country transfer pricing assignments for multinational groups, the optimisation of tax burden, and information requests posed by tax authorities in main industries such as the automotive industry, the oil seeds industry and the pharmaceutical industry.

She has actively participated as a speaker in seminars and conferences at Bolsa de Cereales de Buenos Aires, Consejo Profesional de Ciencias Económicas de la Capital Federal, Bolsa de Comercio de Rosario, Asociación Argentina de Estudios Fiscales etc.

She has written many articles in newspapers and local tax-focused publications such as Ámbito Financiero, Colección Errepar, Buenos Aires Herald, World Trade Executive etc. She is the cowriter of Manual de Precios de Transferencia en Argentina (La Ley 2007).

Silvana Blanco graduated as a certified public accountant at Salvador University and holds a Master degree in Strategic Business Administration and Marketing from Universidad de Ciencias Empresariales y Sociales.

She is a member of the International Fiscal Association and part of the Transfer Pricing Commission.


Horacio Dinice


Partner, international tax and transfer pricing

Deloitte Argentina

Buenos Aires

Tel: +54 11 4321-3002

Fax: +54 11 4320 4066

Mobile: +54 9 11 51507222

Horacio Dinice is a tax partner at Deloitte Argentina. He is mainly engaged in international tax consulting and transfer pricing matters. His experience covers a wide range of industries, but has been centred on the pharmaceutical sector for many years.

He is in charge of the transfer pricing practice in Buenos Aires and LATCO and is one of the partners responsible for the international tax area.

His experience encompasses advising multinational corporations on tax implications of cross-border acquisitions/transactions and the establishment of foreign operations in countries of the Latin American region (Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay & Uruguay).


  • Lead partner on over 100 documentation studies per year

  • Advisory for the international or regional reorganisation of various clients

  • Specialisation in cross-border structuring for Argentinean and Latin American companies.

  • Participation in various mergers and acquisitions in Argentina

  • Development of linked regional cross-border tax planning and transfer pricing solutions

  • Participation in various regional and global transfer pricing projects

Awards, Recognitions, Achievements, and Publications

  • Professor of tax at the University of Buenos Aires (1986-1992) & CEMA (2006-2015)

  • Frequent speaker at conferences focusing on tax and transfer pricing issues

  • Member of the AAEF (IFA member) and participant of the Transfer Pricing Commission

  • Author of articles in international tax publications

  • He participated in technical meetings of improvement and professional development in other countries

  • He dictated advanced training courses organised by the company for professional personnel

Professional Qualifications and Affiliations

Certified public accountant graduated in School in Economic Sciences (University of Buenos Aires, 1986).


Bruno Urrieta Farías


Deloitte Colombia

Carrera 7 74-09,

Bogotá D.C.,

Tel: + 57 (1) 4262303

Bruno Urrieta is a partner in the Bogotá office and responsible for the Colombian transfer pricing practice. For more than 15 years he has assisted multinational and national groups with operations in different industries – mining, manufacturing, media and entertainment, automotive, real estate, hospitality, telecommunications, and retail, among others – in the design, implementation, and/or defense of their TP policies.

Before joining Deloitte Colombia, Bruno was part of the TP practice at the Mexico City office, where he participated in different projects for some of the largest Mexican multinational and national groups, and subsidiaries of important US and Canadian companies that included the application of economic and financial criteria in transfer pricing, the design of intercompany policies and methodologies, valuation of intangible property, business model optimisation, tax controversy situations, negotiation of advance pricing agreements, and documentation projects in order to comply with the local regulations. Additionally, Bruno has broad experience coordinating regional TP documentation and planning projects for multinational groups that have operations in Latin and North America. Finally, he has been the preferred TP adviser to one of the largest Mexican conglomerates with operations in the mining, construction, infrastructure, oil and gas, real estate, and entertainment industries in Mexico, South America, Spain, and the US.

Bruno is a member of Deloitte's technology, media and entertainment and telecommunications tax practice, and has worked on compliance and planning projects with some of the major players in the Mexican and Latin American advertising, media, and entertainment markets.

Bruno holds a Master's degree in strategic business consulting from the Universidad Panamericana and a BA in economics from the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.


Joseph Soto


Tax and transfer pricing partner

Deloitte Ecuador

Tulcán 803 y 9 de Octubre, Ed. El Contemporáneo, Piso 12

Tel: +593 (4) 3700-100 Ext.: 1111

Joseph Soto is an international tax partner in the Guayaquil office of Deloitte Ecuador. He has more than 22 years of experience in tax consulting and transfer pricing for local and multinational corporations. He is a tax and transfer pricing partner and the TP leader for the Ecuador office.

Joseph has a portfolio of clients that includes multinational and local business groups to whom he provides advisory services, tax planning, due diligences services, and tax advice on M&A, including manufacturers, distributors, commercial, telecommunications, services, shipping, airlines, and others.

He is a graduate of the University of Guayaquil and holds an executive master's degree in business administration. He is also a member of the Ecuadorian Institute of Tax Law and the Deloitte tax practice commission.

Joseph has taught taxation subjects in Ecuadorian universities and he has participated as a speaker in business development seminars and in tax matters and transfer pricing programmes.

Joseph regularly contributes articles to various publications specialising in tax and transfer pricing topics.


Federico Paz


Partner, tax and legal

Deloitte El Salvador

Tel: +503 2524 4100

Mobile: +503 7854 6968

Fax: +503 2524 4126

Federico has a BBA from Franklin University. He is the leader of the tax and legal practice in Deloitte's El Salvador office with more than 20 years of experience providing tax advisory services. His main experience includes corporate tax advisory, international tax consulting in the Central American countries, transfer pricing, tax defense and due diligence processes.

As part of his professional development he has participated in different international courses.

He has also been a speaker in several local and international seminars and conferences about taxes and transfer pricing topics.

Federico is a member of the tax committee of the American Chamber of Commerce in El Salvador.

His experience includes topics such as tax and business advisory, including the following service lines and solutions: tax consulting, tax compliance, tax planning, international taxes, M&A, joint ventures, strategic tax-related planning, tax reviews, tax audits, tax due diligence and tax controversy services and transfer pricing. He has also led some relevant due diligence processes in the region. He speaks Spanish and English.

Byron Martinez


Partner | Tax & Legal | Transfer Pricing Deloite Guatemala

5 Avenida 5-55 zona 14, Europlaza Torre IV, Nivel 8. Guatemala 01014

Tel/Direct +502 2384 6500

Byron Martinez is the CEO for Deloitte Guatemala and El Salvador.

He is also the leader of Deloitte Guatemala's transfer pricing practice and the tax risk leader for Deloitte LATCO, a cluster organisation comprising 15 Latin American countries.

With Guatemala's adoption of transfer pricing regulations in 2012, Byron took charge of developing the Deloitte Guatemala transfer pricing practice.

During his 28-year long career as a tax consultant, he has developed extensive experience in providing multinational clients the following services: transfer pricing and tax consulting, tax compliance, tax and legal assistance in M&A, restructurings, and spin offs, tax controversies, strategic tax planning, outsourcing of the tax function and statutory accounting processes, project finance-related tax planning, and local employee and expatriate planning and compliance.

Byron has also provided consulting services related to utilising government incentives such as drawbacks, exports, free zones and bonded warehouses. His industry experience covers banking and finance, consumer business (retail, food and beverages, pharmaceuticals) oil and gas, utilities, telecom, services, manufacturing, transportation, real estate, exporting, and free trade zones.

Byron has published numerous articles on transfer pricing and speaks frequently on transfer pricing issues. He is a professor in taxation at his alma mater the Universidad Rafael Landivar.

Byron is a public accountant and auditor with a Master's degree in finance, incorporated in the Guatemala Public Accountants and Auditors Bar.


Rosemari Cordero


Director, International Tax and Transfer Pricing

Deloite Panama

Tel: +507 303 4100

Role on Engagement

Rosemari is the director in charge of transfer pricing issues in Panamá.


Rosemari has over 20 years of experience in the area of national and international taxation, particularly in tax returns, tax reviews, tax planning, due diligence, successions, organisational structures, indirect tax, international tax, transfer pricing and accounting.

Her professional career began in Deloitte Venezuela – Lara Marambio & Asociados. She started as bookkeeper and later became director of tax.

Since 2012, she has developed the practice of international taxation and transfer pricing at the Deloitte office in Panama.


  • Certified public accountant.

  • Master's degree in business tax management.

  • Member of International Fiscal Association

  • Certificate ITC Leiden Latin America 2016


  • Spanish

  • English


Gloria Guevara


TP partner

Deloitte Peru

Gloria Guevara is the partner responsible for the transfer pricing practice in Deloitte Peru. Gloria has more than 15 years of experience with Deloitte, during which she has advised multinational companies and key local groups operating in diverse industries such as mining, oil and gas, energy, manufacturing, pharmaceutical, consumer business and telecom, media and technology, among others.

Gloria has extensive experience advising her clients on strategic planning design and transfer pricing policies. She has actively participated in high level complexity transfer pricing issues (valuation of intangibles, valuation of mining properties, and residual profit split application), as well as diverse audit defenses regarding this field. She has also advised one of our main clients in the telecom industry on the negotiation of an advance pricing agreement with the national tax administration.

Her experience includes advising strategic clients from mining, telecom and media industries on audit defense, transfer pricing planning for shared service centers and intangible valuation for high level complexity operations related to business restructuring for clients in the consumer business, mining, and TMT industries.

Gloria is also the TMT industry leader at Deloitte Peru. In this role, she is responsible for coordinating and promoting all the services that the firm can offer to the TMT (Technology, Media and Telecommunications) current and potential clients throughout the different business lines. Her responsibilities also extend to the coordination with the TMT regional and global leaders in order to better serve our global TMT clients. Gloria is a frequent speaker on transfer pricing.


  • Adolfo Ibáñez School of Management (Lima-Miami): Executive MBA, class of 2016.

  • Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú: Degree in economics in July 2006. Graduated holding the highest score of the graduation class.

  • Universidad de Lima, Perú: Post graduation degree in businesses' economic management (December 2004).

  • Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú: Social Sciences Degree with major in economics (March 1998 – December 2002). Graduated third in the graduation class.


Alejandra Barrancos


Senior Manager

Deloitte Uruguay

Tel: +598 2916 0756

Alejandra is a senior manager in the transfer pricing practice of Deloitte Uruguay. She has been working in different areas of Deloitte's tax department since 1997. She also worked for the transfer pricing practice of Deloitte Argentina for a few months. During this period she accumulated significant experience in various advisory services to foreign companies: tax compliance, local and international tax planning and transfer pricing. Her experience in transfer pricing projects includes planning projects, documentation projects and also defense in tax audits. She has received training locally in the tax area, while she participated in several TP courses in Uruguay and abroad.


  • Certified Public Accountant, Universidad de la República, Uruguay

  • Degree in Taxation, Universidad Católica del Uruguay

Iliana Salcedo


Partner, transfer pricing

Deloitte Venezuela

Tel: +58 (212) 206 8778; +58 (212) 206 8749

Public accountant. Master in tax management. Iliana has more than 19 years of experience providing tax technical advisory in transfer pricing matters. She contributes to the development of the Deloitte's Andean region transfer pricing practices.

Wide experience in the preparation and review of TP documentation in different industry sectors, e.g. automotive, pharmaceutical, basic materials, mining, chemicals, and services, among others.

She has been actively involved in the development of projects for documenting and designing TP policies, strategies and structures for multinational groups.

Experience in the preparation of the defense of TP audits in Venezuela.

Iliana is a frequent speaker at different TP-related conferences in the Andean region.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.
The Asia-Pacific awards research cycle has now begun – don’t miss on this opportunity be recognised in 2023
An intense period of lobbying and persuasion is under way as the UN secretary-general’s report on the future of international tax cooperation begins to take shape. Ralph Cunningham reports.
Fresh details of the European Commission’s state aid case against Amazon emerge, while a pension fund is suing Amgen over its tax dispute with the Internal Revenue Service.