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

As the firm embarks on a major shakeup of its EMEA partnerships, some staff will be watching nervously
The buyout of Hucke and Associates continues Ryan’s streak of firm acquisitions; in other news, a UK appeal against VAT on private school fees was dismissed
Tax teams are responding to usual client demand in the region, albeit with increased working from home flexibility, local sources indicate
A 120-plus-day delay to refunds would cost taxpayers almost $3bn in additional interest, the Cato Institute warned; plus indirect tax updates from February
The Office for Budget Responsibility’s pessimistic pillar two forecast accompanied the UK chancellor’s muted Spring Statement, dubbed ‘as dull as possible’ by one adviser
Digital tax reform is dissolving the old ‘temporal buffer’, forcing systems, institutions, and professionals to adapt as real-time reporting reshapes governance, capability, and compliance
Our first instalment features analysis of Deloitte’s landmark EMEA merger, Donald Trump’s Supreme Court tariff showdown and Venezuela’s tax evolution
While some believe it could have a positive effect on the wider advisory landscape, others argue that HMRC’s ‘red tape’ exercise won’t deter bad actors
The political optics of the US’s carve-out deal are poor, but as the Fair Tax Foundation’s Paul Monaghan writes, it preserves pillar two’s guiding ethos
The big four firm reportedly sent ‘threatening’ correspondence to Unity Advisory over its hiring of ex-PwC partners; plus tax recruitment news from the week
Gift this article