Brazil: Tax authorities confirm treatment of foreign reimbursements related to partner-administrators or expatriate costs

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

Brazil: Tax authorities confirm treatment of foreign reimbursements related to partner-administrators or expatriate costs

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-pwc.png
Courts in India have generally given a wide connotation to the expression

Alvaro Pereira and Mark Conomy of PwC Brazil explain why the RFB’s publication of SC 2006/2020 has confirmed favourable outcomes for certain transactions although the consequences concerning the broader treatment of foreign reimbursements remains controversial.

The Federal Brazilian Tax Authorities (RFB) on August 25 2020 published Solução de Consulta DISIT/SRRF02 2006 (dated July 20 2020) (SC 2006/2020). It confirms that the reimbursement by a Brazilian entity of certain costs originally supported by an entity in the same group located abroad should not be subject to withholding tax (WHT), or other contributions that are applicable on cross-border payments. Furthermore, it confirms that such amounts should be treated as deductible for corporate income tax purposes where such expenses are necessary to the business activities of the Brazilian entity.



By way of background, the reimbursement of costs to foreign related parties has been a controversial issue over the years. In addition to common cost-sharing issues faced by taxpayers in foreign jurisdictions relating to adequate allocation and documentation criteria, the RFB has recently released decisions providing that international cost-sharing arrangements should generally be treated similarly to the importation of technical services.



This triggers the application of WHT, as well as other federal contributions, being the contribution for the social integration programme (PIS), contribution for social security financing (COFINS) and contribution for intervention in the economic domain (CIDE). The heavy taxation of such import operations often lead to distortionary treatment and practices in international cost-sharing arrangements.



SC 2006/2020 considers reimbursements made by a Brazilian entity to foreign headquarters or a foreign entity within the same group, in relation to supported costs associated with partner-administrators or expatriates resident in Brazil, up to the amount perceived abroad. In summary, SC 2006/2020 considers:

  • The amounts remitted are not subject to WHT as they should not be characterised as income of the foreign company;

  • For the purpose of calculating Brazilian corporate income taxes and contributions (IRPJ and CSLL), the amount reimbursed by the Brazilian company to its foreign headquarters or related party via an invoice should be deductible, provided that such expenses are necessary for the activities of the Brazilian entity for the maintenance of its income production source and is considered usual for the line of business;

  • The amounts remitted are not subject to PIS/COFINS-importations, as they should not be characterised as consideration for services rendered by the foreign company; and

  • The amounts remitted are not subject to CIDE, as they should not be characterised as consideration for the provision of technology, provision of technical assistance, technical services or administrative assistance.


The decision refers to earlier decisions from August 2017 to September 2017, including Solução de Consulta - Cosit 378 dated August 23 2017 (SC 378/2017) and Solução de Consulta - Cosit 469 dated September 21 2017 (SC 469/2017).




While a Solução de Consulta does not represent law or legal precedent, it does provide further support and guidance for Brazilian entities in relation to how the RFB is treating arrangements under consideration.



It is important to highlight that the decisions referred to above contemplate costs passed to the Brazilian entity relating to partner-administrators or expatriates. However, the rationale adopted by the tax authority in coming to its decision appears aligned with previous guidance issued by the RFB supporting the non-application of transaction taxes in the context of international cost-sharing agreements (i.e. that the reimbursement does not constitute income in the hands of the foreign entity).



In the context of international cost-sharing arrangements, the recent trend of decisions by the RFB has been to characterise such remittances as income, consideration or remuneration for technical services (depending on the particular tax or contribution). As such, while the decision is favourable for certain operations, the treatment of broader international cost-sharing arrangements remains controversial.

Alvaro Pereira

T: +55 11 3674 6526 

E: alvaro.pereira@pwc.com



Mark Conomy

T: +55 11 3674 2002

E: conomy.mark@pwc.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

While it’s great that the OECD is alive to multinationals’ fears of being caught in a compliance trap, the ‘common understanding’ illustrates a worrying lack of readiness
Rising demand for specialist expertise has fuelled the growth in tax partner headcounts, Cain Dwyer found; in other news, Switzerland has been urged to reconsider pillar two
An OECD report on the taxation of the digital economy is expected by the end of 2026, according to the group of nations
Trophy assets are evolving from personal indulgences to structured investments, prompting family offices to prioritise tax efficiency, governance discipline, and cross-border compliance
As demand for complex, cross-border private client counsel spikes, Patrick McCormick sees opportunity in starting from scratch
As part of an exclusive global alliance, KPMG will become one of Anthropic’s ‘preferred consultants’ for private equity
In the second part of this series, the focus shifts to how taxpayers can manage ongoing risks across the lifecycle of cross-border structures
Jurisdictions have moved to ensure that multinationals are not punished for late GIR filings due to a lack of available filing portals or exchange relationships
HMRC’s push for unified tax adviser registration won’t prevent every instance of improper conduct, but it is good for taxpayers and the UK’s reputation
Elsewhere, the UAE’s tax office has issued an update on registration penalties and two firms have been busy making lateral hires
Gift this article