Mexico: Update on capital repatriation initiative

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

Mexico: Update on capital repatriation initiative

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
Update on capital repatriation initiative
matias.jpg
santoyo.jpg

Sol

Matias

Ricardo

Santoyo

Mexico's Tax Service Administration (SAT) released interpretative guidance on August 29 2017 that affects taxpayers who have elected to take advantage of the capital repatriation programme that was launched on January 18 2017.

The capital repatriation initiative allows taxpayers (both entities and individuals) that earned income from previously unreported direct and indirect offshore investments, which were held abroad until December 31 2016, to bring the funds back to Mexico. Taxpayers can pay a specified tax on the funds and be deemed to have met their tax obligations in Mexico for the fiscal year in which the payment is made and for the previous fiscal years in which the investment was held. The requirements to benefit from the capital repatriation initiative include the following:

  • The taxpayer must pay an 8% tax on the repatriated amount within 15 days following the date the amount is brought back into Mexico;

  • The repatriation must be made during the period January 19 2017 to October 19 2017 (the previous deadline of July 19 has been extended by three months); and

  • The funds must be invested in Mexico for at least two years.

Initially, funds were deemed to be invested in Mexico if the investment was made through financial instruments issued by residents of Mexico or in shares issued by Mexican companies. The SAT has now re-interpreted the "investment" requirement, so that the benefits of the repatriation initiative may not be available in one of two circumstances:

1) The repatriation transaction is carried out after October 19 2017, and/or the Mexican taxpayer is able to exercise control over the investment decisions taken by the company whose shares have been acquired; or

2) The repatriated funds are used by the Mexican company whose shares were acquired to invest abroad.

In both cases, the SAT will consider the transactions to constitute unacceptable practices and the benefits of the capital repatriation regime may be forfeited.

Additionally, any person that advises, renders services or participates in the implementation of such a transaction will be deemed to have engaged in an unacceptable practice and may be subject to examination and sanctions by the SAT.

The SAT has taken the position that, since one of the purposes of the capital repatriation initiative is to encourage capital investment, allowing an investment in the shares of a Mexican company and then allowing the capital to leave the country thwarts the objective of the programme.

It is important for persons that have control over corporate decisions to invest abroad to remember that they potentially are subject to the unacceptable practice consequences. Such persons should perform a careful analysis to ensure that they do not have any exposure in the context of the capital repatriation regime.

Sol Matias (smatias@deloittemx.com) and Ricardo Santoyo (risantoyo@deloittemx.com)

Deloitte

Website: www.deloitte.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