Chile: Tax treatment of capital reductions by the recipient entity

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

The ruling is ‘well-structured’ in its references to the OECD TP guidelines, one expert says, while another argues it overlooks key technical issues
India also brokered its first-ever multilateral APA last year, the Central Board of Taxes announced
A global tax framework may not materialise anytime soon, but a common set of principles is becoming increasingly necessary, Rudolf Winkenius also tells ITR
Kingsley Napley’s claimants are arguing that taxing the provision of education breaches the European Convention on Human Rights
While pillar two can progress without the US, it won’t reach the same heights without American involvement, argues Renáta Bláhová, founding partner of BMB Partners Taxand
There are unanswered questions as to how foreign investors could reclaim money via tax credits, advisers suggested
Amid an ever-changing tax environment, India’s advisory market is bustling with competition ahead of the 2025 World Tax rankings and ITR Awards
The deal comes after PwC had accused Paul McNab of using confidential information; in other news, McDermott hired a new London tax head from a US rival
Looking at transfer pricing simplification is “obviously helpful”, but it should be done in line with current standards, a senior government figure reportedly said
The UK Government’s plans to close the tax gap via increased HM Revenue and Customs investment have failed to impress local tax advisers
Gift this article