Mexico: Update on capital repatriation initiative

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

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 & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Holland & Knight, Nelson Mullins and McCarter & English made the joint-most tax partner hires in the US last year, according to annual ITR Talent Tracker data
Despite a three-year-high in tax revenues generated from settling TP cases, HMRC reported a sharp fall in resolved MAP disputes
Inflexion’s proposed minority stake in Baker Tilly Netherlands could propel the firm in the Dutch market, CEO Ronald Hoeksel tells ITR
While the US’s dramatic exit from the OECD’s global tax deal naturally grabbed headlines, Trump’s premeditated move shouldn’t detract from pillar two’s lofty ambitions
The ‘big four’ firm’s audit of gambling company Entain is under the spotlight; in other news, Ireland shrugs off Trump’s rejection of pillar two
Mid-market European private equity house Inflexion, which also backs law firm DWF, has agreed to acquire a minority stake in the Dutch tax advisory firm
Donald Trump’s inauguration, pillar two, APAs and TP were all up for discussion as ITR spoke to Baker McKenzie’s two newly minted US partners
In-house teams that want a balance of internal control and external expertise for pillar two should seriously consider co-sourcing models, Russell Gammon of Tax Systems argues
The OECD has vowed to continue working with the US despite the president effectively pulling the country out of the organisation’s global minimum tax deal
Norton Rose Fulbright highlights a Brazilian investment fund as a practical example of how new Dutch tax rules will require significant attention from foreign companies
Gift this article