Mexico: Tax authorities' new guidance on permanent establishment
International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Mexico: Tax authorities' new guidance on permanent establishment

cuellar-david.jpg

montemayor-blas.jpg

David Cuellar and Blas Montemayor, PwC

Early in April and July 2013, the Mexican tax authorities published new internal criteria regarding some aspects of the Mexican federal tax legislation, including international tax matters. These criteria are intended to help clarify the interpretation of the Mexican tax provisions, which are rather complex and also to make clear the position of the Mexican tax authorities with respect to specific tax issues.

In this regard, one of the above mentioned criterions dealing with international matters provides the tax authorities' view on how to read the permanent establishment (PE) definition under domestic law.

Under the Mexican income tax law (MITL) the general definition of the term PE is any place of business in which business activities are partially or totally carried out or independent personal services are rendered. For these purposes, the MITL provides a non-exhaustive list of examples of places that may be considered a PE, including branches, agencies, offices, factories, workshops, installations, mines, quarries or any place of exploration, mining or exploitation of nature resources.

According to the tax authorities' new internal criteria, the list of non-exhaustive PE examples should not be read in an isolated basis but rather such examples should be read in light of the definition of a PE (a place in which business activities are carried out or services are rendered).

For instance, a foreign resident that has an office in Mexico would be able to conclude if such office triggers a PE in this country only after analysing whether or not in such office business activities are conducted or services are rendered. As noted, although the presence of a foreign resident may frequently raise a red flag for tax purposes; the mere fact of having an office in Mexico cannot be conclusive as to whether or not a PE is triggered. To arrive at a conclusion on potential PE risk in Mexico, the specific facts and circumstances should be analysed in light of the Mexican tax provisions and the tax treaties signed by Mexico and the relevant OECD commentaries, when applicable.

Although the Mexican tax authorities' criteria is not mandatory and it does not have the weight of the Mexican tax law (since such criteria is not approved by the Mexican Congress), it provides a realistic guidance for taxpayers when determining the existence of a Mexican PE, which is a very complex topic that should be carefully analysed by foreign multinationals that have or are planning to have presence in Mexico.

David Cuellar (david.cuellar@mx.pwc.com) and Blas Montemayor (blas.montemayor@us.pwc.com)

PwC

Tel: +52 55 5263 5816

Fax: +52 55 5263 6010

Website: www.pwc.com

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The Senate report into PwC’s scandal is titled ‘The cover up worsens the crime’
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
The firm’s tax business generated a quarter of HLB’s overall revenues in 2023
While successful pillar two implementation will require collaboration across all units, a combination of internal and external tax advice is at the centre of the effort
Binance has also been accused of manipulating foreign exchange rates via currency speculation and rate-fixing
Six individuals should have raised questions over information they received but did not breach professional standards, according to the firm
The partnership of KPMG UK has installed Holt for a second term as CEO and senior partner; in other news, a Baker McKenzie partner has sued the IRS
HSBC has settled a claim originally worth £240m relating to a failed film tax relief scheme without admitting liability or wrongdoing
Their prediction comes after the IRS announced it would send compliance letters to large foreign companies emphasising their US tax obligations
The ex-client is also suing the entire EY Australia partnership
Gift this article