Chile: Tax treatment of capital reductions by the recipient entity

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

Chile: Tax treatment of capital reductions by the recipient entity

pelegri.jpg

winter.jpg

Loreto Pelegrí


Rodrigo Winter

Article 17(7) of the Corporate Income Tax Law, provides a special allocation and tax regime for capital reductions, establishing that, as general rule, these distributions are considered a non–taxable income for the recipient shareholders. However, this general rule has two exceptions:

  • When the amounts returned correspond to taxable profits (capitalised or not) that have not been paid the corresponding final income tax; and

  • When the amounts returned to the shareholders correspond to financial profits in excess of taxable profits.

Before the issuance of Ruling No. 2145 and No. 2146 of 2013 by the Chilean Internal Revenue Service (Chilean IRS), there was no certainty on how a capital reduction should be registered by the recipient entity.

In fact, there was a criterion under which capital reductions were treated as a non-taxable income at the receiving shareholder provided that it could be effectively allocated to the paid in capital and its corresponding readjustments. Under this interpretation, the subsequent distributions of those amounts were not subject to withholding tax since it was allocated to non-taxable profits.

The other criterion was to treat this capital reduction as a lower cost basis at the level of the investor which cannot be treated as non-taxable profit.

For purposes of clarifying this uncertainty, the Chilean IRS issued in October 2013 Revenue Rulings No. 2145 and No. 2146, which establish the criterion regarding the registration of these non–taxable profits in the accounting records of the receiving shareholder, when the latter is an entity or a person that needs to keep full accounting records for tax purposes.

These rulings provide that capital reductions, allocated to paid-in capital, must be registered by the beneficiary as a lower cost basis at the level of the investor but cannot increase the beneficiary's non-taxable fund ledger.

The criterion contained in these rulings clarify the way in which capital returns must be registered in the tax accounting records of the receiving shareholder and change the interpretation in which capital returns had been registered in Chile for decades.

Loreto Pelegrí (loreto.pelegri@cl.pwc.com) and Rodrigo Winter (rodrigo.winter@cl.pwc.com)

PwC

Tel: (+56 2) 29400588

Website: www.pwc.com/cl

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Magnus Pantzar is set to join as managing director after spending nearly a decade as EQT’s global head of tax
The OECD’s project was up for debate as Matt Williams spoke to ITR following BDO’s tax strategist survey, which uncovered increased complexity and costs among multinationals
Sponsored by Deloitte
Sameer Nurmohamed, partner, Deloitte Legal Canada
Sponsored by Deloitte
George Ankomah, partner, Tax & Regulatory Services, Deloitte Africa (Ghana)
The recent spree of firm mergers and acquisitions proves that geographic scale is the name of the game
The big four spin-off firm becomes Taxand’s second UK member; in other news, Haynes Boone launched a UK tax practice
Sponsored by Deloitte Luxembourg
Jean-Michel Henry and Mona El-Begawi of Deloitte Luxembourg examine the complexities created by timing differences in Luxembourg, EU, and OECD tax regimes
Stephanie Pantelidaki’s economic expertise will give Norton Rose Fulbright’s other teams ‘extra firepower,’ she says
Sponsored by MFA Legal & Tech
Samuel Fernandes de Almeida of MFA Legal & Tech assesses whether Portugal’s 7.5% surcharge on non-residents aligns with the EU’s free movement of capital principle and passes the proportionality test
Sponsored by McCarthy Tétrault
Senior McCarthy Tétrault tax practitioners highlight significant updates and implications for multinationals as Canada’s transfer pricing rules become more closely aligned with OECD guidance
Gift this article