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 2026

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

The Australian Taxation Office believes the Swedish furniture company has used TP to evade paying tax it owes
Supermarket chain Morrisons is facing a £17 million ($23 million) tax bill; in other news, Donald Trump has cut proposed tariffs
The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
The £7.4m buyout marks MHA’s latest acquisition since listing on the London Stock Exchange earlier this year
ITR’s most prolific stories of the year charted public pillar two spats, the continued fallout from the PwC Australia tax leaks scandal, and a headline tax fraud trial
The climbdowns pave the way for a side-by-side deal to be concluded this week, as per the US Treasury secretary’s expectation; in other news, Taft added a 10-partner tax team
Gift this article