Apresentação do PowerPoint - Núcleo de Estudos Fiscais

Report
IV SEMINÁRIO INTERNACIONAL
REFORMA TRIBUTÁRIA E OS DESAFIOS DA AMÉRICA LATINA
4 de novembro de 2014
Programação – 04 de novembro de 2014
8h30: credenciamento
13h30 às 14h: Dr. Marcus Senna – Diretor jurídico do grupo CCR
9h00 às 9h30: Abertura – Dr. Eurico Marcos Diniz de Santi – NEF (Núcleo de Estudos
Fiscais) da FGV e Dr. Luís Rogério G. Farinelli – Machado Associados Advogados e
Consultores
14h às 14h30: Venezuela – Dr. Juan Carlos Garanton – Torres, Plaz e Araujo
•
14h30 às 15h: Peru – César Luna-Victoria – Rubio Leguia Normand & Asociados
Palestrantes:
9h30 às 10h00: Brasil – Dr. Júlio M. de Oliveira – Machado Associados Advogados e
Consultores
10h00 às 10:30h: Argentina – Dr. Cristian Rosso Alba – Rosso Alba, Francia & Asociados
10h30 às 11h00: Coffee break
11h00 às 11h30: Chile – Dr. Jorge Espinosa – Espinosa e Asociados, Abogados y
Consultores
11h30 às 12h00: Colômbia – Dr. Adrian Rodriguez – Lewin & Wills Abogados
12h às 13h30 Intervalo para almoço (livre)
15h às 15h30: Estados Unidos – Dr. Miguel A. Valdés – Andersen Tax
15h30 às 15h50: Perguntas
Encerramento:
15h50 às 16h: Dr. Luís Rogério G. Farinelli – Machado Associados Advogados e
Consultores
A partir das 16h: Lançamento do livro “Ética Concorrencial – reflexão, análise e
perspectivas”
ARGENTINA
IV SEMINARIO DE LATAXNET
•
Reforma Tributaria y sus Desafíos en
Latinoamérica
• ARGENTINA
• Por Dr. Cristian E. Rosso Alba
 Ley 26.893 (B.O. 23/9/2013)
o Principales cambios:
o a) Gravabilidad de resultados por venta de acciones,
participaciones sociales, títulos, y demás valores; y
o b) Gravabilidad de dividendos y otras utilidades en dinero o
especie (excepto acciones) distribuidos por sociedades,
fideicomisos y fondos comunes de inversión
 Decreto reglamentario 2334/14 (B.O. 7.2.14)
o Vigencia:
 Para el caso de la enajenación de acciones, cuotas o participaciones
sociales, títulos, bonos y demás valores: para las transacciones cuyo pago
se efectúe a partir del 23 de septiembre de 2013, inclusive
 En el caso de dividendos o utilidades: para aquellos puestos a disposición
de sus beneficiarios, a partir del 23 de septiembre de 2013, inclusive
o Exenciones: títulos con cotización bajo normas CNV.
o Personas físicas del exterior (compraventa de acciones): aplica la alícuota
efectiva del 13,5% o 15% sobre renta real para cualquier sujeto del
exterior
o Imposibilidad de retención en caso de distribución de dividendos: la
entidad pagadora deberá ingresar la retención, sin perjuicio de su derecho
de exigir el reintegro
 Profundización del intercambio de información (e.g. acuerdos
con Andorra, Aruba, Bahamas, etc.)
 En esta línea, se eliminó el concepto de “paraíso fiscal” por la
diferenciación entre países cooperadores o no cooperadores a los
fines de la transparencia fiscal.
 Evitar la doble imposición: se denunciaron tres convenios
(España, Chile, Suiza). Prioridad: doble NO imposición. Caso
Molinos.
 El interés de la Administración no apunta a evitar la doble
imposición, sino al intercambio de información tributaria
Albania
Alemania
Andorra
Angola
Anguila
Cuba
Curazao
Dinamarca
Ecuador
El Salvador
Arabia Saudita
Emiratos Árabes
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Eslovaquia
Eslovenia
España
Austria
Estados Unidos
Azerbaiyán
Bahamas
Bélgica
Belice
Bermudas
Bolivia
Brasil
Caimán
Canadá
Estonia
Feroe
Filipinas
Finlandia
Francia
Georgia
Ghana
Grecia
Groenlandia
Checa
Guatemala
Chile
China
Guernsey
Haití
Ciudad del Vaticano
Honduras
Colombia
Corea del Sur
Costa Rica
Hungría
India
Indonesia
Croacia
Irlanda
Isla de Man
Islandia
Israel
Italia
Jamaica
Nueva Zelanda
Panamá
Países Bajos
Paraguay
Perú
Israel Israel, Estado de
Japón
Jersey
Kenia
Polonia
Portugal
Qatar
Reino Unido
Kuwait
Letonia
Liechtenstein
Lituania
Luxemburgo
Macao
Macedonia
Malta
Marruecos
Mauricio
República Dominicana
Rumania
Rusia
San Marino
Sint Maarten
Singapur
Sudáfrica
Suecia
Suiza
Túnez
México
Moldavia
Mónaco
Islas Turcas y Caicos
Turkmenistán
Turquía
Montenegro
Montserrat
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Ucrania
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam
Noruega
Islas Vírgenes Británicas
 BEPS: Plan de Acción Nº 13 (Master File, Country by Country
Report, Local File).
 Se espera en breve más reporting en precios de transferencia, a
partir de la preocupación generada por la erosión de la base
imponible y la dislocación de rentas.
 En función de ello, van a quedar manifiestas las diferencias entre
países importadores y exportadores de capital.
 Se espera: elevado número de controversias / menor recepción
de la Administración a mecanismos de solución de conflictos.
 Como parte de una mayor fiscalización de precios de
transferencia:
 Operaciones triangulares.
 Exportaciones de commodities. Sexto método y contrapeso
judicial.
 Estructuras fiduciarias internacionales, con puntos de contacto en
Argentina por settlor, trustee o beneficiaries.
 Incremento de los pagos a cuenta: eg. Res. Gral AFIP 3577.
Volume 72, Number 3
October 21, 2013
by Cristian E. Rosso Alba and Juan Marcos Rougès
Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, October 21, 2013, p. 253
(C) Tax Analysts 2013. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party
content.
Milestone Treaty Shopping Case
FromArgentina’s Tax Court
by Cristian E. Rosso Alba and Juan Marcos Rougès
Cristian E. Rosso Alba is a partner and Juan Marcos Rougès is an associate with Rosso Alba, Francia &
Asociados in Buenos Aires.
T
he Argentine National Tax Court recently decided
a milestone case regarding treaty shopping. In
Molinos,1 the tax court, with the affirmative vote of two
recently appointed judges, overlooked the benefits of
the Argentina-Chile income tax treaty regarding dividends distributed from a Chilean holding company to
an upper-tier majority shareholder, which was located
in Argentina. The Chilean holding company, in turn,
distributed dividends collected from lower-tier subsidiaries located outside of Chile, taking advantage of the
beneficial holding company status, applicable in Chile,
called ‘‘plataforma fiscal.’’
While it is true that the interaction of domestic law,
tax treaties, and international taxation norms sometimes offers taxpayers opportunities to reduce their tax
burden, it does not necessarily mean that those taxpayers are engaged in tax evasion. The limits are the law,
as approved by the National Congress, and the business rationale of the taxpayer’s structuring, which supports the nontax reasons underlying an international
reorganization.
In this scenario, the roles of companies and tax authorities are clear. Companies have an obligation to
their investors to structure their affairs in a tax-efficient
manner to legally optimize their tax burdens. Tax authorities, on the other hand, are required to scrutinize
tax compliance and enforce existing tax laws. In this
1
Molinos Río de la Plata, Aug. 14, 2013, Chamber D, National
Tax Court.
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
regard, tax authorities can rely on numerous antiabuse
provisions embedded in domestic tax law and tax treaties allowing them to challenge artificial arrangements,2
if the constitutional hierarchy (treaties rank above domestic legislation in Argentina) is observed.
Recently, the tax court has analyzed all the above
matters in the Molinos case.3 The controversial decision
of the tax court, which upheld the Argentine Revenue
Service’s (ARS) position, disregarded the tax exemption (provided under the Argentina-Chile income tax
treaty) in the case of dividends distributed by a Chilean holding corporation to its Argentine shareholder.
The tax court concluded that the international corporate structure of the group was tailored exclusively
to benefit from the treaty’s provisions to ensure international double nontaxation. The tax court held that
there had been an abuse of the treaty, and therefore,
dividends received by the Argentine shareholder from
2004-2009 should be taxed at a 35 percent rate.
This article analyzes the relevant aspects of the tax
court’s decision and the dispute between the ARS and
Molinos Río de la Plata from the perspective of international tax law and Argentine tax standards (with special consideration given to the treaty).
2
Oliver R. Hoor and Georges Bock, ‘‘The Misleading Debate
About Corporate Tax Avoidance by Multinationals,’’ Tax Notes
Int’l, May 27, 2013, p. 907.
3
Molinos, Aug. 14, 2013, Chamber D, National Tax Court.
OCTOBER 2 1, 2 013 • 253
(C) Tax Analysts 2013. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
Milestone Treaty Shopping Case From Argentina’s Tax
Court
FEATURED PERSPECTIVES
Arg.
Corp.
Dividends
taxed
F
Corp.
Background
The Argentina-Chile treaty was signed in 1976 and
remained in force from 1985 until 2012, when Argentina unilaterally denounced it, principally alleging
abuse of benefits by Argentine taxpayers.4
The treaty provided that dividends could only be
taxed by the source state,5 since the mechanism to avoid
double taxation was the exemption method. Therefore,
while the repatriation of profits from a Chil- ean
subsidiary6 was not taxed in the hands of the Argentine shareholder, in any other case, a 35 percent tax
rate was applicable.7 (See Figure 1.)
In December 2002, Chile enacted the Business Platform Law8 for tackling tax barriers to international investment. The regime enabled foreign investors to set
up a platform company for channeling and managing
investments in third countries, allowing them to tap
into Chile’s advantages without having to pay Chilean
tax on earnings from these overseas investments.
Under domestic law, platform companies were not
considered resident or domiciled in Chile and were only
liable to the country’s taxes on income from Chil- ean
sources, for example, dividends distributed by companies incorporated in Chile or capital gains from the
sale of shares in those companies. Income generated
abroad as a result of investments or services, or as
capital gains from the sale of non-Chilean assets was
not subject to any income tax, either on the income
itself or on its remittance overseas.
4
The government gave two reasons for terminating the treaty.
The first was a provision that prohibited Argentina from collecting personal asset tax from Chilean shareholders with interests in
Argentine companies. The second was the alleged abuse of holding corporations to achieve double nontaxation.
5
The treaty provided that dividends ‘‘would only be taxed by
the state where the company, the distributor of the dividends, is
domiciled.’’
6
As long as it is domiciled in Chile.
7
Except for dividends distributed by local corporations, which
are not taxed under Argentine law. Even so, an equalization tax
could be applicable.
8
Act 19.849 (Chile).
25 4 • OCTOBER 2 1, 2 013
Arg.
Corp.
Dividends
not taxed
Chile
Corp.
For different business reasons, some multinational
corporations decided to use platform companies in order to manage their investments in different jurisdictions, and when jointly structured with an Argentine
shareholder, double nontaxation could occur at the moment of repatriation of benefits. (See Figure 2.)
Figure 2. The Case Under Tax
Court Scrutiny
Arg.
Corp.
Foreign-source
income not taxed
under Chilean
holding regime
Dividends
not taxed
under tax
treaty
Chile
Holding
F
Corp.
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
Platform companies were challenged by the ARS,
which said the treaty provisions could not apply, and
therefore, dividends received by the Argentine shareholder should be taxed at a 35 percent rate. This criterion was different from the one used by the Chilean tax
authorities,9 which argued that the treaty only fo- cuses
on the source of the income and the domicile of the
entity that distributes the dividend — namely the
location of incorporation and where it is recognized as
a legal entity — and it is clear that sociedades de plataforma (platform companies) meet these standards for
treaty entitlement. This is an important issue, since the
9
The Chilean competent authority ruled that despite their specific tax status, sociedades de plataforma are eligible for the benefits
of the Argentina-Chile treaty; Oficios Nos. 5.029 y 5.66 de 2003
y 550 de 2008, from the Chilean Internal Revenue Service.
(C) Tax Analysts 2013. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
Figure 1. Tax Status Without and With Argentina-Chile Tax Treaty
FEATURED PERSPECTIVES
In this context, Molinos de Chile y Río de la Plata
Holding SA was constituted and registered as a platform company before the Internal Revenue Service of
Chile as Molinos Río de la Plata, the owner of 99.99
percent of the shares. In 2004 Molinos Río de la Plata
transferred to the platform company all the shares of
Alimentos del Plata SA, Molinos Overseas SA, Molinos de Uruguay SA (companies incorporated in Uruguay), and Molinos de Peru SA (a company incorporated in Peru).
The practical effect of the incorporation of Molinos
de Chile y Río de la Plata Holding SA and of the subsequent transfer of shares from Molinos Río de la
Plata to the platform company was that all the dividends paid to the company were not subject to Argentina’s income tax.
The ARS challenged Molinos Río de la Plata’s tax
scheme on the grounds that Molinos de Chile y Río de
la Plata Holding SA had acted as a conduit company
for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the provisions of the treaty.
Tax Court Decision
As noted above, the tax court ruled against the taxpayer. It said the structure was abusive and therefore
treaty benefits did not apply, based principally on the
following considerations:
 Interpretation of tax treaties — abuse of the treaty provisions: The purpose of the treaty is to avoid double
taxation, not to create situations of international
double nontaxation. Tax planning admittedly reduces corporate global costs, but double nontaxation is not a goal of the treaty.
 The plataformas fiscal tax status could not be envisioned and addressed by the treaty’s negotiators (1976):
The treaty could not apply to situations that could
not have been in the minds of the negotiators,
since the holding company regime was introduced
in late 2002.
 Treaty abuse by one of the contracting states — unilateral amendment by the Chilean government: Even
though Chile has the authority to grant tax exemptions on dividends, the 2002 holding company
regime modified the facts and legislation that were
taken into account to negotiate the treaty. This
unilateral decision could be challenged by Argentina because it leads to a situation that was not
intended by the treaty — double nontaxation.
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
 Local general antiabuse rules are applicable: Although
there is no general antiavoidance rule in the
treaty, local GAARs could apply.
 Substance over form — the holding company was not
considered the beneficial owner of the dividends received
from foreign corporations: The beneficial ownership
standard is an implicit requirement for tax treaty
benefits to apply. The tax court determined that
the holding entity acted as a conduit company to
avoid paying taxes on repatriation.
 No substance in Chile: No trade or business was performed by the Chilean holding company.
 Absolute control: Molinos Río de la Plata had 99.99
percent of the capital of Molinos de Chile y Río
de la Plata Holding SA, and the court regarded
this fact as negative.
 Foreign-source income vs. Chilean-source income: The
tax court said that while foreign-source income
received by the holding company (which is not
subject to tax in Chile) was immediately distributed to Argentina, Chilean-source income (which
is taxable) was never distributed. This fact pattern
of dividend distributions was seen as negative.
 No evidence of the business purpose of the corporate
structure: The tax court said there was no evidence
that the 2003 group restructuring was part of a
sound business strategy.
In short, the tax court applied the beneficial ownership standard, even though it was not included in the
Argentina-Chile treaty, in order to consider Molinos de
Chile y Río de la Plata Holding SA a conduit company and, consequently, to declare that the dividends
received by Molinos Río de la Plata Holding SA from
2004-2009The
should
Importance
be taxed at aof35Substance
percent rate.
The substance of this decision — the first one by the
tax court directly related to the alleged abuse of the
Argentina-Chile treaty — is evident if we consider that
in 2012 Argentina denounced similar treaties (those
with Switzerland and Spain) on the grounds of treaty
abuse by taxpayers.
While Argentina has the power to unilaterally denounce a treaty that it thinks may be outdated or lead
to double nontaxation, it cannot overlook a treaty while
it is in force. In that case, a denouncement should work
prospectively, not retroactively. The deci- sion of the tax
court to apply the beneficial ownership concept to the
interpretation of the facts of this case is questionable,
since the Argentina-Chile treaty (which follows the
Andean Pact model) does not include such a provision.
The beneficial ownership concept — pro- vided for in
the OECD and U.N. model treaties — is an antiabuse
rule designed to preclude treaty shopping by agents,
nominees, or conduit companies for the ben- efit of a
resident of a third state.
OCTOBER 2 1, 2 013 • 255
(C) Tax Analysts 2013. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
Argentina-Chile tax treaty was patterned after the Andean Pact (Pacto Andino) model convention, which
(unlike the OECD model tax convention) does not require that the company under discussion be liable to
taxes in its country of incorporation. Let’s recall that
under the OECD model convention, a company entitled to treaty protection is any taxable unit that is
treated as a body corporate according to the tax laws
of the contracting state where it is organized.
FEATURED PERSPECTIVES
We agree, however, on the importance of substance,
as well as the need for a taxpayer to have clear and
documented business reasons to validly profit from a
tax treaty. We believe that the ruling has highlighted
that taxpayers must be able to provide evidence showing the economic grounds for the implemented corporate structure in order to prove that the Chilean holding company has not been incorporated for the sole
purpose of benefiting from the treaty. This issue depends on the evidence collected during the controversy,
and despite questions from the tax court, it is a factual
issue that is not clear from the decision itself.
Despite reaching the same conclusions, the opinions
from the tax court judges are on different grounds,
namely, that there has been abusive treaty shopping by
the taxpayer. While one focuses more on the inability of
the treaty norms to cope with the platform company
issues — a highly questionable argument, since the
courts may not fix, by interpretation, the treaty wording — the second one concentrates more on the lack of
evidence regarding appropriate substance. However, no
clear standards have been determined by the tax court.
The court should have focused on whether there was an
actual place of effective management in Chile, meaning
that control of Molinos de Chile y Río de la Plata
Holding SA was exercised in Chile. In this re- gard,
we found no elaboration in the decision on ques- tions
such as whether:
 the majority of the company’s directors were residents in Chile, and their material salaries were
borne by that company;
 important company decisions were made in Chile
by the board of directors;
 the company’s headquarters were located in Chile,
where the company oversees local and foreign
investments; and
10
Law 19865 (Argentina).
25 6 • OCTOBER 2 1, 2 013
 the company had an economic and business rationale to be located in Chile.
In fact, if a holding company is used solely for gaining access to the benefits of a treaty, without a business
rationale, there are reasonable chances for the structure
to fail altogether and be regarded as fictitious, and
therefore not able to obtain the treaty benefits pursued.
Proper and sufficient evidence of this standard, and the
previous standards, is essential for the controversy to
succeed. For one tax court judge, some indications of
the lack of substance are:
 exclusive distributions, to the Argentine shareholder, of dividends collected from non-Chilean
sources (distribution from the lower-tier Chilean
companies did not occur);
 the Argentine company having full control of the
Chilean company;
 dividends collected from outside Chile flow
through the Chilean company to the Argentine
shareholder;
 all of the companies are engaged in the same
business: dividends collected from Uruguayan subsidiaries are triggered by similar activities to that of
the Argentine company;
 there is no evidence of the business reasons for
contributing the Uruguayan and Peruvian entities
to the Chilean holding company; and
 the limited managing powers of the Chilean entity.
At least the first four standards are questionable.
The policy on dividend distribution should not be relevant for treaty entitlement purposes.
Having a majority shareholder in Argentina does not
impair the business reasons that a lower-tier hold- ing
company may have to act as such — overseeing and
managing its investments — if it has effective
management in its jurisdiction of incorporation. The
‘‘identical business of the group companies’’ standard is
unclear, since the Argentine originating company
would have a functional paradigm of origination, while
the Uruguayan affiliate would have one of commercialization. Each company is required to comply with
the arm’s-length standard in their jurisdiction of incorporation.
The tax court’s decision — with substantially different arguments used by each judge to disregard the tax
treaty benefits — again raised the question of what
appropriate substance is in order to be eligible for treaty
benefits. According to the tax court, Molinos de Chile
y Río de la Plata Holding SA did not meet those
standards and qualified as a conduit company. The
Federal Court of Appeals will have the next word.
◆
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
(C) Tax Analysts 2013. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
It would be inconsistent with the purpose of the
treaty to grant relief or exemption when a resident of a
contracting state, other than through an agency or
nominee relationship, acts as a conduit for another person who effectively receives the benefits of the income
concerned. While this general standard is in compliance with the provisions of the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties,10 and avoids the automatic and
illegitimate application of concepts and rules, going
beyond the treaty wording — such as the requirement
to comply with the beneficial ownership standard —
would not be valid under the Argentina-Chile treaty.
(C) Tax Analysts 2014. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
COUNTRY DIGEST
• Albania
• Under the previous rules, a penalty of 5 percent per month (or portion thereof)
applied when a taxpayer submitted a self-correction of an original tax return, with a
ceiling of 25 percent of the outstanding liability. This penalty has been revoked.
•
• Finally, the deadline to appeal a preliminary tax ad- justment made after an audit
was extended to 15 calen- dar days from the date of notification of the adjust- ment (as
opposed to the previous five calendar days).
Amended Tax Laws Take Effect
• The Albanian parliament recently enacted a number of tax amendments that entered
into force on January 1.
• The standard corporate income tax rate was in- creased from 10 percent to 15
percent. Also, when computing their taxable profits, banks now can deduct impairment
loans (bad debt provision expenses) regis- tered in accordance with international
financial report- ing standards without being subject to a cap. Previ- ously, the tax
deduction was capped at an amount determined according to the regulations of the
Bank of Albania.
• Companies’ cash transactions valued at more than ALL 150,000 (about $1,437) now
are nondeductible for corporate income tax purposes. Previously, the thresh- old was
ALL 300,000 (about $2,890).
• Also, the flat 10 percent personal income tax rate was converted into progressive
rates for employment income as follows:
 less than ALL 30,000 (about $287.50): 0 percent;
•
 ALL 30,001 to ALL 130,000 (about $1,246): 13
 Slim Gargouri, chartered accountant, Sfax, Tunisia
• Argentina
•
Government Reveals Main Focus of International Tax
Audits
• The Argentine government has disclosed the target of upcoming tax audits relating
percent; and
to international trans- actions through a series of measures implemented over the past
 over ALL 130,000: 23 percent.
few weeks by the Argentine Revenue Service (AFIP).
• Other kinds of personal income (dividends, rental income, capital gains, interest,
and so on) remain sub- ject to the 10 percent income tax rate.
• The first regulation, General Resolution 3577/14 (GR 3577), which set up a new
advance tax payment mechanism to penalize triangular international transac- tions, was
• Foreign employees of contractors and subcontractors working on hydrocarbon
justified by, among other reasons, the need to bring Argentine law into line with the
projects will no longer be ex- empt from personal income tax.
OECD’s ac- tion plan to address base erosion and profit shifting, published on July 19,
• The VAT exemption that applies to contractors and subcontractors involved in oil
2013.1
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
extraction activities now will be restricted to the research phase of hydrocarbon
operations. The supply of goods and services for the development phase of
• The new measures have also instituted a registry for related and deemed-related
hydrocarbon operations will no longer be VAT exempt.
parties, as well as new re- porting obligations, the amendment of the previous blacklist
• Also, as of April 1, supplies of medicines and medi- cal services will be VAT
of tax havens by means of a new white list of
exempt. Previously, VAT ap- plied to those supplies at the rate of 10 percent.
•
1
As of January 17, the Addressing Base Erosion and Profit
Shifting report was available at http://www.oecd.org/ctp/bepsreports.htm.
JANUARY 27, 2 014 • 30 3
ARGENTINA
Following is a brief summary of the recent regulations.
GR 3577
The new advance payment mechanism established by
GR 3577 will be enforced by the Customs Author- ity.
The new withholding tax, which is creditable against
the annual income tax burden, applies to trian- gular
exports (that is, when the country where the in- voice is
addressed differs from the country of destina- tion of
the exported products). The new regime applies to
exports taking place from January 7 onward. (Prior
coverage: Tax Notes Int’l, Jan. 20, 2014, p. 206.)
The rate is 0.5 percent of the taxable value as defined for the payment of customs taxes, or 2 percent if
the invoices were issued to buyers located in countries
considered to be uncooperative in the exchange of tax
information. The advance payment is considered to be
a payment of income tax and should therefore be reflected in the relevant tax returns.
Failure to make the advance tax payment will result
in suspension from the customs registries and the application of interest.
It should be noted that a predicted overpayment of
the annual income tax is not grounds to request immunity from the new advance payment. In fact, taxpayers
subject to this regime may not cite exclusion from another advance payment mechanism implemented
through GR 830 as cause to be excluded from the new
one. In that sense, taxpayers with net operating losses
corresponding to the fiscal year in which the exports
take place may face a new tax burden and are now
evaluating — and in some cases filing — legal actions.
Finally, the new regime introduces another penalty
as part of a more complex (delayed) procedure for requesting a refund of VAT input credits associated with
exports. VAT refund requests related to triangular exports will be excluded from the general procedure for
export VAT refunds contained in Title I of (AFIP) GR
2000 and will instead be subject to Title IV of GR
2000, which is more time consuming and has a higher
GR 3572
tax burden.
GR 3572 creates, as of January 3, a registry of affiliated parties; Argentine taxpayers must report in the
registry their affiliation with entities located in Argentina or abroad. (Prior coverage: Tax Notes Int’l, Jan. 6,
2014, p. 41.)
For that purpose, the definition of the term ‘‘affiliation’’ follows that in GR 1122/2001, which governs
transactions that are subject to transfer pricing scrutiny.
30 4 • JANUARY 27, 2 014
The concept of ‘‘affiliated party’’ included in this
broad definition includes both actual and deemed related parties.2
Within 10 days of the occurrence of affiliation, the
Argentine entities that are required to join in the registry must provide the name and country of residency of
the affiliated party and the type of affiliation. The dissolution of an affiliation must also be reported. The
deadlines for enrollment in the registry are April 1 or
July 1, depending on the size of the taxpayer.
2
GR 1122/01, implementing section 15.1 of the Income Tax
Law, establishes that affiliation exists when:
 an individual or corporation owns all or most of another entity’s equity;
 two or more individuals or corporations have a common
holder for all or most of their equities;
 the same individual or corporation owns all or most of
the equity of one or more entities and significantly in-
fluences one or more of the other entities;
 the same individual or corporation has significant concurrent influence;
 an individual or corporation owns the necessary votes to
make corporate decisions or prevail in the shareholders’
or partners’ meeting of another entity;
 two or more individuals or corporations have common
directors, officers, or administrators;
 an individual or corporation is the exclusive agent, distributor, or licensee for the purchase and sale of assets,
services, or rights of the other;
 an individual or corporation provides another with
copyright or know-how that constitutes the basis of its
operations;
 an individual or corporation owns an interest, with another, in entities with no legal capacity (for example,
condominiums, joint ventures, noncorporate groups, and
so on) through which it exercises significant influence on
prices;
 an individual or corporation agrees with the other on
preferential contractual conditions as compared with
those agreed upon with third parties under similar circumstances (for example, volume discounts, financing,
and deliveries on consignment);
 an individual or corporation substantially participates in
the formation of corporate policies, the supply of raw
materials, and/or the production and/or marketing of
another;
 an individual or corporation undertakes a significant
activity only in relation to another entity, or exists only
in relation to the other entity (for example, as the sole
supplier or client);
 an individual or corporation substantially provides the
funding necessary to carry out another’s business (for
example, loans or guarantees for financing provided by
a third party);
 an individual or corporation bears the burden of losses
or the expenses of another;
 the directors, officers, or administrators of an entity receive orders from or proceed in favor of another; or
 the management is given to an individual or entity holding a minority interest in the capital stock (through
agreements or special circumstances or situations).
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
(C) Tax Analysts 2014. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
countries considered to be cooperative for tax information exchange purposes, and the fine-tuning of reporting obligations relating to foreign trusts, which now
face more detailed filing obligations.
AUSTRALIA
Panama, Paraguay, the Philippines, Qatar, Turkmenistan, the United Arab Emirates, Vatican City,
Venezuela, and Vietnam.
GR 3576
In line with Decree 589/2013, published on May
30, 2013, AFIP has finally published on its official
website the list of countries deemed as cooperative jurisdictions (the white list), as anticipated by GR 3576
(of December 31, 2013). (Prior coverage of Decree
589/2013: Tax Notes Int’l, June 10, 2013, p. 1051; prior
coverage of GR 3576: Tax Notes Int’l, Jan. 20, 2014, p.
205.)
According to the new list, cooperative jurisdictions
are those that have signed with Argentina a tax information exchange agreement or a tax treaty that contains a broad information exchange clause, or that have
entered into negotiations with Argentina for a TIEA or
a tax treaty containing an information exchange clause.
Some countries formerly included in a blacklist contained in the Income Tax Law Regulatory Decree have
now been included as cooperative, while others previously excluded from the blacklist are not on the new
white list (for example, Bulgaria, Fiji, Saudi Arabia,
and Taiwan).
The following countries are deemed to be cooperative under three categories included in the new white
list:
 Countries that have signed income tax treaties with Argentina: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil,
Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,
Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Spain,
Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
 Countries that have signed TIEAs with Argentina or the
OECD’s Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Albania, Andorra,
Anguilla, Aruba, Austria, Azerbaijan, the Bahamas, Belize, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands,
the Cayman Islands, Chile, China, Colombia,
Costa Rica, Croatia, Curaçao, the Czech Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, the Faroe Islands, Georgia,
Ghana, Greece, Greenland, Guatemala, Guernsey,
Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, the
Isle of Man, Italy, Japan, Jersey, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montserrat, Morocco,
New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, St. Martin, San Marino, Saudi Arabia,
Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South
Korea, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Turks and
Caicos, Ukraine, the United States, and Uruguay.
 Countries currently negotiating an income tax treaty or
TIEA with Argentina: Angola, Armenia, Cuba, the
Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya, Kuwait, Macau,
Macedonia, Mauritius, Montenegro, Nicaragua,
GR 3538
Finally, in connection with the regime implemented
in 2012 through GR 3312, which broadened the scope
of the registration and reporting obligations to target
foreign trusts and other equivalent foreign structures
that have a substantial nexus with an Argentine party,
GR 3538 includes the obligation to submit to AFIP a
PDF file containing supporting documentation for the
registered operations, as well as the trust contracts and
any amendments of transactions registered from January 1, 2013, onward.
 Cristian E. Rosso Alba and Lucía Ibarreche, Rosso Alba,
Francia & Asociados, Buenos Aires
Australia
NEWS ANALYSIS
ATO May Allow Large Companies to
Manage Own Compliance
A draft document prepared by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) that appeared on January 15 (it is
not clear whether the release of the document was authorized) suggests that the ATO may outsource some
audit activities by allowing large public companies to
use their own auditors to sign off on the companies’
tax affairs.
The proposal has prompted considerable attention
and discussion, with some critics adopting colorful language — putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop
and putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank, for
example — to describe the plan.
It is probably not a coincidence that the idea of outsourcing to accounting firms tasks that traditionally
were viewed as fundamental ATO activities follows the
appointment in late 2012 of a commissioner of taxation who was, for the first time, from outside the public
service ranks of the ATO. To the surprise of many, the
left-leaning Labor government in power at the time
appointed, with effect from 2013, a candidate from the
private sector, a former partner in charge of the New
South Wales Tax and Legal Division of KPMG.
The proposal set out in the discussion draft, euphemistically labeled the ‘‘external compliance assurance
process,’’ would be available to large public companies
with turnover between AUD 100 million and AUD 5
billion. A qualifying company would be able to use (at
its own cost) the services of its external private-sector
audit firm to verify to the ATO that the company is
JANUARY 27, 2 014 • 30 5
TAX NOTES INTERNATIONAL
(C) Tax Analysts 2014. All rights reserved. Tax Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content.
Failure to meet the obligations contained in GR
3572 will result in the application of penalties in accordance with the Tax Procedure Act.
CHILE
Modificaciones con efectos tributarios en Chile
Jorge Espinosa S.
2014
20
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
La principal novedad de la Reforma Tributaria (Ley 20.780), es la introducción, a partir del 01
de enero de 2017, de dos regímenes “principales” tributación entre los cuales los
contribuyentes deben optar y que poseen características disimiles entre si. De esta forma se
establece un sistema de Renta Atribuida cuya principal característica es que los Impuestos
Finales, esto es el Impuesto Global Complementario e Impuesto Adicional, determinan en base
devengada y el sistema de Integración Parcial se mantiene de cierta forma las condiciones
actuales en cuanto a que los impuestos Finales se determinan en base percibida.
21
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
A.
Renta Atribuida
a) Tasa de Impuesto:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
Año comercial 2014: 21%
Año comercial 2015: 22,5%
Año comercial 2016: 24%
Año comercial 2017: 25%
22
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
A.
Renta Atribuida: Letra A) art. 14
b) Efectos Principales:
i. A Nivel de Impuesto Global Complementario
ii. A nivel de Impuesto Adicional
c)
Atribución entre los socios y accionistas
i. EI, EIRL y las Agencias, Sucursales o Establecimientos Permanentes.
ii. S.A., SpA, SRL y otros (deber de informar)
23
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
B.
Sistema de Integración Parcial: Letra B) art. 14.
a) Tasa de Impuesto:
i. Año comercial 2017: 25,5%
ii. Año comercial 2018: 27%
24
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
B.
Sistema de Integración Parcial: Letra B) art. 14.
b) Efectos Principales:
i. A Nivel de Impuesto Global Complementario.
ii. A nivel de Impuesto Adicional.
iii. Efectos en Convenios de Doble Tributación.
25
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
C.
Relaciones entre ambos sistemas
a)
Régimen General:
Los Empresarios Individuales, las EIRL, Comunidades y SRL éstas últimas compuestas
sólo personas naturales residentes y/o domiciliados en Chile, a falta de acuerdo expreso
en contrario tendrán el régimen de renta atribuida.
Las S.A., SpA y cualquier otro tipo de sociedad donde uno de sus participes es una
persona natural o jurídica sin domicilio ni residencia en Chile, a falta de acuerdo, se
regirán por el sistema de integración parcial.
26
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
C.
Relaciones entre ambos sistemas
b) Opción por régimen y permanencia:
i. Sociedades nuevas: 60 días desde inicio de sus operaciones.
ii. Sociedades antiguas: 3 últimos meses del año comerciales anterior (2016).
iii. Permanencia mínima en un régimen por 5 años.
27
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
C.
Relaciones entre ambos sistemas
c)
Requisitos de la opción del régimen:
i. EI, EIRL, Agencias, Sucursales y Establecimientos Permanentes: Declaración.
ii. Comunidades: Declaración unánime.
iii. SRL y SpA: Declaración y Escritura Pública acuerdo unánime.
iv. Sociedades Anónimas: 2/3 de los accionistas en JEA reducida a Escritura Pública
y Declaración.
28
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
C.
Relaciones entre ambos sistemas
d) Grupos Empresariales:
i. Cuando la matriz esta bajo sistema de integración parcial y las filiales bajo renta
atribuida (“transparencia”).
ii. Cuando la matriz esta bajo renta atribuida y las filiales en régimen de integración
parcial.
iii. Cuando en filiales hay distintos regímenes.
29
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
D.
Beneficios especiales para la pequeña y mediana empresa:
a)
Exención del Impuesto Adicional:
Por servicios pagados al exterior por concepto de publicidad y el uso y suscripción de
plataformas de servicios tecnológicos de internet, salvo que exista relación entre las
partes o se remesen a un paraíso fiscal.
Para empresas cuyos ingresos promedio en los últimos 3 años no superen las 100.000
Unidades de Fomento.
30
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Nuevos Sistemas del Impuesto de Primera Categoría:
b)
Contribuyentes de las letras A) y B) del art. 14 con ingresos del giro hasta 100.000 UF
podrán:
- Sujetos a la letra A) podrán deducir hasta un 20% de la RLI que se mantengan invertida
en la empresa.
- Sujetos a la letra B) podrán deducir hasta un 50% de la RLI que se mantengan invertida
en la empresa.
• El limite de deducción son 4.000 UF.
• Reinversión= RLI – Retiros o distribuciones
• Esta opción se debe comunicar al SII
• El contribuyente no puede poseer ni explotar derechos sociales, cuotas de FI o FM,
ni acciones. Además sus inversiones en renta fija no podrán exceder del 10% de sus
ingresos.
31
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Enajenación de acciones y/o Derechos sociales. Vigencia desde 01 de enero de 2017
(i)
El mayor valor se determina en base a la diferencia entre el precio de venta y el
valor de adquisición reajustado.
(ii)
Si las acciones o derechos están sujetas al régimen de la lera A) del art. 14 (rentra
atribuida), se debe disminuir del mayor valor las sumas correspondientes a
utilidades atribuidas propias que le correspondan al vendedor que no hayan sido
retiradas de la empresa al cierre del ejercicio anterior a la fecha de venta debido que
estas rentas ya completaron su tributación. Del monto destinado a esta disminución
se deben descontar los retiros efectuados por el vendedor en el año de la venta.
(iii) Si entre la fecha de adquisición y la fecha de venta hay menos de 1 año, el mayor
valor quedará gravado con el Impuesto de Primera Categoría y el Impuesto Global
Complementario o Impuesto Adicional según corresponda. El mayor valor podrá ser
reconocido por el contribuyente en base percibida o devengada a su elección.
32
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Enajenación de acciones y/o Derechos sociales.
(iv) Si entre la fecha de la compra y la venta hay un plazo superior a un año, el mayor
valor determinado se grava únicamente con el Impuesto Global Complementario o
Impuesto Adicional. El mayor valor podrá ser reconocido por el contribuyente en
base percibida o devengada a su elección.
(v)
Si el contribuyente esta sujeto al Impuesto Global Complementario y reconoce el
mayor valor en base devengada, podrá tomar 2 opciones:
a)
Reconocer todo mayor valor en el año de la operación
b)
Distribuir el mayor valor durante todo el periodo en que las acciones o derechos
estuvieron en su poder con un máximo de 10 años. En este caso el
contribuyente procederá a re liquidar su IGC por cada año, asignando la parte el
mayor valor que le corresponda como resultado de dividir el mayor valor por la
cantidad de años que las acciones o derechos estuvieron en su poder.
33
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Enajenación de acciones y/o Derechos sociales.
(vi) El enajenante puede compensar las utilidades con las perdidas sufridas por
operaciones en un mismo ejercicio .
(vii) Si las enajenaciones se efectúen a partes relacionadas, al cónyuge, ascendientes o
descendientes hasta el 2° grado de consanguinidad, independiente del plazo
existente entre la adquisición y la venta, el mayor valor quedará sujeto al Imp. de
Primera Categoría e Imp. Global Complementario o Adicional según corresponda.
(iv) Los contribuyentes que no estén sujetos a Impuesto de Primera Categoría en base a
renta efectiva y el mayor valor determinado por estas operaciones dentro de un
ejercicio comercial sea inferior a 10 UTA, se considerará como un ingreso no renta.
En caso que se supere el monto señalado la totalidad del mayor valor quedará sujeta
a las normas generales.
34
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
a)
Información sobre Inversiones en el Extranjero: n°1 Letra E) art. 14
(i)
Sólo contribuyentes acogidos a letras A) y B) art. 14
(ii) Monto, tipo y porcentaje de participaciones de sus inversiones en el exterior
(iii) Destino de los fondos
(iv) País destinatario de la inversión
(v) La declaración se efectúa el 30 de junio de cada año. La no presentación de la
declaración jurada implicará que dichas sumas tengan la tributación del art. 21.
(vi) Si hay inversiones en paraísos fiscales o países considerados como de baja o
nula tributación se deberá además informar el estado de las inversiones, sus
aumentos o disminuciones y el destino que las entidades extranjeras le otorgan
35
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
b)
Trust: n°2 Letra E) art. 14.
(i)
Toda persona que sea Constituyente o settlor, Beneficiario, Trustee o
administrador deberá informar anualmente.
(ii) Nombre, fecha de creación y país de origen, residencia tributaria y la
identificación tributaria del Trust.
(iii) Nombre, domicilio, país de residencia para efectos tributarios y la identificación
tributaria del Constituyente o settlor, Beneficiario, Trustee o administrador.
(iv) Si la obtención de beneficios esta sujeta a la voluntad del trustee o a otra
condición y si existen varias calidad o tipos de beneficiarios.
36
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
c)
Artículo 41 G: Control de Rentas Pasivas en el exterior
Las empresas o entidades con domicilio o residencia en Chile que, directa o
indirectamente, controlen entidades extranjeras deberán considerar como
devengadas o percibidas la proporción que les corresponda según su participación
social, las rentas pasivas percibidas o devengadas por dichas entidades en el
exterior. Se considera también una entidad controlada cuanto ésta se encuentra en
un país o territorio considerado como de baja o nula tributación según el art. 41 H.
No estarán obligados a reconocer como devengadas las rentas pasivas cuando en el
ejercicio respectivo las rentas no excedan de 2.400 Unidades de Fomento.
37
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
c)
Artículo 41 G: Que entiende por rentas pasivas
i.
Utilidades percibidas o devengadas por la entidad extranjera controlada, salvo que
provengan de una sociedad operativa cuyo giro no sea obtener rentas pasivas
ii.
Intereses y capitales mobiliarios, salvo que provengan de una entidad bancaria o
financiera regulada y no domiciliada en paraísos fiscales según los art. 41 D y 41 H
iii.
Regalías
iv.
Rentas de Capitales por bienes o derechos
iv.
Arrendamiento de inmuebles, salvo que sea el giro principal de la entidad controlada
38
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
c)
Artículo 41 G: Que entiende por rentas pasivas
v.
Rentas por bienes inmuebles, salvo que hayan sido utilizados para la generación de
rentas distintas de aquellas consideradas rentas pasivas.
vi.
Rentas por derechos de uso de derechos o bienes que sean generados de las
rentas pasivas.
vii. Rentas por operaciones con partes relacionadas (según art. 41 E) domiciliadas en
Chile y siempre que la renta sea un gasto deducible y se trate de una RFE o siendo
Renta de fuente chilena tenga una tributación menor al 35%.
viii. Se presume que todas las rentas obtenidas por una entidad domiciliada o residente
en un país, territorio o jurisdicción considerado como régimen fiscal preferencial,
tienen el carácter de rentas pasivas
39
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
d)
Artículo 41 H: países o territorios con régimen fiscal preferencial.
Serán aquellos que cumplan al menos dos de las siguientes condiciones:
(i)
Cuando la Tasa efectiva sobre los ingreso de fuente extranjera será inferior a
17,5% (50% de la tasa del art. 58).
(ii) No tengan con Chile un Convenio de intercambio de información para fines
tributarios.
(iii) En el territorio no posee reglas que permitan fiscalizar los precios de
transferencia que en general se ajsuten a las recomendaciones de la OECD
40
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas especiales
d)
Artículo 41 H: países o territorios con régimen fiscal preferencial.
(iv) La legislación no permiten solicitar información a sus administrados ni entregar
la información a terceros.
(v) Aquellos que gravan únicamente las rentas de fuente nacional
(vi) Aquellos territorios considerados por la OECD o la ONU, como regímenes
preferenciales para fines tributarios
41
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario. Vigencia 01 de octubre de 2015.
a) Articulo 4 Bis
(i)
Establece la supremacía de la sustancia por sobre la forma.
(ii)
Se consagra la buena fe del contribuyente respecto de la manera en que realiza sus
operaciones
(iii) El SII tiene la carga de la Prueba para determinar abuso o simulación.
b) Artículo 4 Ter. Hay abuso cuando mediante actos o negocios jurídicos.:
(i)
Se evita total o parcialmente el Hecho Gravado.
(ii)
Se disminuye la Base Imponible
(iii) Posterga o difiera el nacimiento de una obligación tributaria.
42
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario
b) Artículo 4 Ter. Continuación.
Con todo se reconoce la “economía de opción de contribuyente” cuando los efectos de los
actos jurídicos sean consecuencia de la Ley Tributaria.
c) Artículo 4 Quater. Simulación.
Hay simulación cuando los actos disimulan la configuración de un hecho gravado del impuesto
o la naturaleza de los elementos constitutivos de la obligación tributaria o su verdadero monto
data de nacimiento.
43
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario
d) Artículo 4 Quinquies. Procedimiento
(i)
El SII debe citar al contribuyente para que entregue información sobre sus
operaciones
(ii)
El Director posee un plazo de 9 meses desde la contestación del contribuyente para
analizar si procede o no realizar un requerimiento.
(iii) En caso afirmativo el Director respectivo deberá concurrir a un TTA con el objeto que
declare un acto constitutivo de abuso o simulación.
(iv) Para que proceda la solicitud las diferencias de impuestos deben ser superiores a
250 UTM.
(v)
El contribuyente posee un plazo de 90 para efectuar sus descargos.
44
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario
d) Artículo 4 Quinquies. Procedimiento
(vii) La resolución del TTA debe ser fundada señalando el monto del impuesto adeudado,
los interés y mutas correspondientes.
(viii) La sentencia es apelable (15 días).
(ix) Contra la sentencia de segunda instancia procede los recursos de casación en la
forma y casación en el fondo.
45
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario
e) Artículo 26 Bis. Procedimiento de consulta
(i)
El contribuyente tiene la posibilidad de efectuar una consulta al SII para determinar si
sus operaciones pueden ser constitutivas de alguna de la circunstancias de los
artículos 4° bis, 4° ter y 4° quater.
(ii)
El SII tendrá un plazo de 30 días para despachar la respuesta, la cual será vinculante
para el SII sólo respecto de las operaciones descritas por el contribuyente y solo
respecto de ese contribuyente.
(iii) En caso que dentro de los 30 días el SII no entregue su respuesta la solicitud del
contribuyente se entenderá rechazada.
46
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario
f) Artículo 100 Bis.
La persona natural o jurídica respecto de quien se acredite haber diseñado o planificado los
actos, contratos o negocios constitutivos de abuso o simulación, según lo dispuesto en los
artículos 4° ter y 4° quáter de este Código, será sancionado con multa de hasta el 100% de
todos los impuestos que deberían haberse enterado en arcas fiscales, de no mediar dichas
conductas indebidas, y que se determinen al contribuyente. Con todo, dicha multa no podrá
superar las 100 unidades tributarias anuales.
Para estos efectos, en caso que la infracción haya sido cometida por una persona jurídica, la
sanción señalada será aplicada a sus directores o representantes legales si hubieren infringido
sus deberes de dirección y supervisión.
47
REFORMA TRIBUTARIA
Normas Anti elusivas: Código Tributario
d) Artículo 100 Bis.
Para efectos de lo dispuesto en el presente artículo, el Servicio sólo podrá aplicar la multa a
que se refieren los incisos precedentes cuando, en el caso de haberse deducido reclamación
en contra de la respectiva liquidación, giro o resolución, ella se encuentre resuelta por
sentencia firme y ejecutoriada, o cuando no se haya deducido reclamo y los plazos para
hacerlo se encuentren vencidos. La prescripción de la acción para perseguir esta sanción
pecuniaria será de seis años contados desde el vencimiento del plazo para declarar y pagar
los impuestos eludidos.”.
48
PRECIOS DE TRANSFERENCIA
A. Operaciones objeto de Precios de Transferencias.
Para los efectos de esta ley, el Servicio podrá impugnar los precios, valores o rentabilidades fijados, o establecerlos en caso
de no haberse fijado alguno, cuando las operaciones transfronterizas y aquellas que den cuenta de las reorganizaciones o
reestructuraciones empresariales o de negocios que contribuyentes domiciliados, o residentes o establecidos en Chile, se
lleven a cabo con partes relacionadas en el extranjero y no se hayan efectuado a precios, valores o rentabilidades
normales de mercado (art. 41 letra E)
49
PRECIOS DE TRANSFERENCIA
B.
Métodos establecidos para los Precios de Transferencia
i.
Método de Precio Comparable no Controlado:
ii.
Método de Precio de Reventa:
iii.
Método de Costo más Margen:
iv.
Método de División de Utilidades:
v.
Método Transaccional de Márgenes Netos:
vi.
Métodos Residuales:
50
PRECIOS DE TRANSFERENCIA
C.
Obligados a Presentar Declaración Jurada: 30 de junio.
i.
Contribuyentes pertenecientes al segmento de Medianas y Grandes Empresas que al 31 de diciembre del año respectivo posean operaciones con partes relacionadas en el exterior.
ii.
Contribuyentes que sin tener el carácter de mediana o gran empresa posean operaciones con personas domiciliadas o residentes en paraísos fiscales.
iii.
Contribuyentes que efectúen operaciones con partes relacionadas en el exterior por montos superiores a $ 500.000.0000 o su equivalente en moneda extranjera.
D.
Otros
i.
Existencia de APA´s
ii.
Ajustes correlativos
51
FATCA
A. Propósito:
Fiscalizar que los contribuyentes de Estados Unidos denominados (US Person) o Entidades
Norteamericanas (US Entity), realicen el pago de impuestos por las ganancias obtenidas en
otros países, derivadas de inversiones financieras.
i.
US Person: personas naturales que se encuentren en alguna(s) de las hipótesis
siguientes: (i) ser ciudadanos norteamericanos; (ii) ser residentes en los Estados Unidos;
(iii) ser titular de una “green card”;
ii.
US Entity: las sociedades anónimas y las sociedades de personas constituidas en
Estados Unidos; (ii) las sucesiones y fideicomisos estadounidenses
B. Vigencia: A partir del 01 de julio de 2014
52
FATCA
C. Modalidad: Acuerdo “tipo B”
Las entidades financieras, luego de registrarse ante la administración tributaria (IRS), deberán
remitir directamente a dicho servicio la información de las cuentas o productos financieros
mantenidos por contribuyentes norteamericanos en Chile, cuyos saldos en cuenta corriente
superen los USD 50.000.
Con el propósito de resguardar las normas chilenas sobre secreto bancario y otras similares,
concernientes a la protección de datos privados, las entidades financieras deberán requerir
autorización por escrito de las personas cuya información corresponda reportar. En caso que
el cuentacorrentista se niegue a dar su autorización, la institución financiera sólo deberá
reportar información agregada del valor de las cuentas, el monto de los pagos hechos y
recibidos, y asimismo el número total de estos
53
COLÔMBIA
IV Seminario Internacional
Reforma Tributaria y sus Desa1os en
America La6na
El Caso de Colombia
Por: Adrián Rodríguez P.
[email protected]
Noviembre 4 de 2014
Panorama Macroeconomico
En los úl6mos 15 años, el Presupuesto General de la Nación (PGN)
viene en constante Incremento:
La tendencia con6nuará: Atención del CONFLICTO armado (y luego
de la PAZ), el crecimiento de la red de INFRAESTRUCTURA del país,
EDUCACIÓN y demás compromisos sociales del Gobierno.
Panorama Macroeconomico
El PGN2015 6ene gastos no financiados por COP $12,5B:
El deficit del PGN 2015 – 2018 se es6ma en COP $50B (sin ajustes).
Panorama Macroeconomico
La caida del precio del petróleo ha erosionado materialmente los
ingresos de la Nación:
Otros factores que contribuyen a esta tendencia a corto plazo,
internos: SEGURIDAD, AMBIENTAL, COMUNIDADES, OPERATIVOS;
externos: MEXICO.
Panorama Macroeconomico
La Regla Fiscal en Colombia, desde 2012
•En reforma cons6tucional de 2011, con vigencia a par6r de 2012
Colombia adoptó una Regla Fiscal, para logar en una década el
saneamiento de las finanzas públicas.
•La Regla Fiscal limita la capacidad de endeudamiento del
Gobierno imponiendole que el déficit entre el ingreso estructural y
el gasto estructural no supere 2.3% del PIB en 2014, 2.3% del PIB
en 2018, y el obje6vo final de 1% en 2022.
•En consecuencia el déficit presupuestal en exceso NO puede
financiarse con endeudamiento, sino que debe financiarse con
ingresos del Estado.
Panorama Macroeconomico
Desafio Corto Plazo
Aumentar el Recaudo Tributario
Polí; cas Fiscales más agresivas en contra de la evasión:
•Lucha frontal contra el uso de paraisos fiscales;
• Ampliación acelerada red de intercambio de información;
• TIEAs
• FATCA
• OECD por requerimiento de otros miembros, AUTOMATICO (2017)
•Entre otras acciones, Adopción temprana de B E P S, buscando
membresía OECD;
•Cambio 180o en polí6ca fiscal internacional respecto de la negociación
de Tratados para evitar la doble tributación.
Desafio Corto Plazo
Aumentar el Recaudo Tributario
En la Ley de Reforma Tributaria de 2012, vigentes desde 2013 :
• Entre otras, la adopción de normas generales y específicas en contra del abuso tributario:
• GAAR de amplio espectro, se define por primera vez “Abuso Tributario”;
• Nuevas reglas reorganizaciones más estrictas (aportes, fusiones y escisiones);
• Cambio en las normas de residencia para individuos y sociedades;
• Nueva regla de POEM para gravar sociedades offshore administradas desde Colombia;
• Nuevo régimen domésaco de PE;
• Nueva regla de capitalización delgada, “Thin‐Cap”;
• ISR 33% vs. CREE 9% (8% 2016) + ISR 25% = 34%, en adición a una limitación en
las deducciones de la base para CREE.
Desafio Corto Plazo
• Aumentar el Recaudo Tributario
• En el Proyecto de Reforma Tributaria de 2014, vigente desde 2015, se propone :
• Extensión por 4 años del impuesto “temporal” a los Movimientos Financieros a tarifa del 0.4%;
• Nuevo Impuesto “temporal” (4 años) al Patrimonio (mayores de USD $500K, aprox.) a tarifas entre 0.2% y 1.5%;
• Nuevo Impuesto de Normalización, 10% 2015, 15% 2016 y 20% 2017;
• Sobretasa de CREE de 3% + CREE 9%
deducciones de la base para CREE; y
+ ISR 25% = 37%, en adición a una limitación en las
• Anuncio en exposición de mo6vos de futura adopción de régimen de transparencia ana‐diferimiento (“CFC
Rules”), para ciertas rentas pasivas cómo dividendos, intereses y regalías de vehículos offshore controlados por el
contribuyente.
3 Desafios de Polí6ca Fiscal
a Largo Plazo
•Enderezar el régimen tributario de orden nacional, haciendolo más “universal” y
“sencillo,” con el obje6vo de buscar un aumento del recaudo via una poli6ca
restric6va de incen6vos desorganizados que han erosionado la base gravable,
remplazando con esto actuales impuestos an6‐tecnicos temporales que se
volvieron permanentes.
•Modernización de la ges6ón tributaria en materia de auditorias,
potencializando el impacto y eficiencia de las mismas, facultando a las
autoridades de impuestos para terminar controversias an6cipadamente (bajo
ciertos supuestos) –como se ha venido haciendo ocasionalmente–, aumentando
certeza y disminuyendo proliferación de controversias y li6gios tributarios.
•Avanzar en la protección de los derechos y garanmas fundamentales de los
contribuyentes dando efecto efec6vo a las acciones de la Defensoría del
Contribuyente, y adoptando mecanismos que disminuyan la exposición a
conductas corruptas “hoy aisladas pero presentes,” y a la confirmación
automá6ca de decisiones en auditorias oficiales sin la seria consideración de las
razones y pruenas aportadas por el contribuyente.
Obrigado!
ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ P.
[email protected]
Pracace Areas: O&G; M&A; Tax, Interna; onal Tax and Tax Controversies; and Interna; onal Investment.
Mr. Rodriguez is a partner with LEWIN & WILLS and the co‐head of the Tax group. He first joined the Firm in 1995 and has over
20 years of experience in the fields of Interna6onal Corporate Taxa6on, Interna6onal Investments and in Mergers and
Acquisi6ons.
Mr. Rodriguez is well recognized for his experience in tax law with an emphasis in M&A, interna6onal tax planning,
restructurings and reorganiza6ons, and interna6onal business transac6ons, with a heavy involvement in the O&G industry.
He advises domes6c and interna6onal clients on new and ongoing business opera6ons in Colombia and La6n America in a
variety of industries and projects, with emphasis on interna6onal and domes6c corporate taxa6on, outbound and inbound
cross‐border investment projects, and related M&A, Interna6onal Investments and Corporate laws issues.
Mr. Rodriguez is licensed for the prac6ce of law in Colombia (95’) and in the States of New York (03’) and Illinois (03’) in the
United States of America. He holds LL.M. degrees from both New York University in the United States of America in
Interna6onal Taxa6on (02’), and Universidad del Rosario in Colombia in Colombian Taxa6on (95’), and a J.D. degree from
Universidad de los Andes in Colombia.
Over his 20 yrs. of experience, Mr. Rodriguez has wrix en many ar6cles on taxa6on and has par6cipated as speaker and
panelist in many events in Colombia and abroad.
Previously Held Posiaons: Sidley Aus; n, New York (Associate, 07’‐09’); Baker & McKenzie, Chicago (Associate, 02’‐04’); and
Arthur Andersen, Colombia (Associate, 93’‐95’).
A new tax framework for Colombia
10 YEARS
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
By: Andrés Gonzá[email protected], Juan Pablo Wills- [email protected]
On December 26th 2012, the tax reform approved by the Colombian Congress (Act 1607/2012) entered
into force. The 2012 tax reform encompasses material changes to the current income tax framework for
both corporations and individuals, to the transfer-pricing regime and to the Colombian VAT rules. In
addition to Colombian nationals and residents, the changes will impact foreign corporations and
individuals with businesses and investments in Colombia.
In this issue, Colombian_Tax_Flash® brings our readership a summary of the main changes that the Tax
reform brings concerning the following issues:
(1)in matters of corporate taxation: (1.1) the reduction of statutory rates for corporate income and capital
gains taxes, (1.2) a new net income tax replacing certain wage-based employer welfare contributions,
(1.3) adoption of domestic permanent establishment (PE) rules, (1.4) adoption of a branch-profits tax
applicable to both branches and PEs (1.5) adoption of the “effective place of management” as a criteria to
determine corporate residency (1.6) adoption of thin capitalization rules, (1.7) changes to the tax-free
reorganizations framework (1.8) amendments to the tax credit (1.9) adoption of a General Anti-Avoidance
Rule (GAAR), (1.10) changes to the depreciation rules;
(2) in matters of income taxation of individuals: changes in expatriate taxation, among others;
(3)in matters related to VAT: the possibility to credit the VAT paid upon importation or upon acquisition of
capital assets against the taxpayer’s income tax, among others;
(4)in matters related to the Colombian Transfer-Pricing regime: (4.1) amendments on the criteria to
determine when a transaction is completed by related parties, (4.2) rules on transfer-pricing elements on
business restructurings. (4.3) appraisal method for sale of shares between related parties; and
(5) the anticipated termination of current administrative and judicial proceedings.
Please bear in mind that this is a selective summary for informational purposes only that focuses on
certain topics of the approved tax reform. Therefore, it is not intended to be a detailed and comprehensive
dissertation of the 2012 tax reform. Although not featured herein, there are other measures and changes
enacted by the Act 1607/2012 in income and VAT taxation and in other areas, which are also important
for our readers to keep in mind. Therefore, it is advisable that our readers do not exclusively rely on this
document and thoroughly review the measures and changes that could affect them, seeking qualified
advice from professional tax attorneys duly admitted to the practice of law in Colombia.
In matters of taxation, 2013 has been a prolific year and in addition to the 2012 tax reform, currently there
are many other changes in other pieces of legislation both at a national and local level, which are not
featured in this issue of Colombian_Tax_Flash®. For more information on these, you can visit us on twitter
@colombiatax.
The use, translation, reproduction or retransmission by any means in whole or in part of this document is
prohibited without the prior written consent of one of the partners of LEWIN & WILLS.
A new tax framework for Colombia
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
10 YEARS
1.
Corporate Income Taxation
1.1.
25% Corporate Income Tax and 10% Capital Gains Tax
The statutory 33% income tax rate for corporations and similar entities (e.g. branches
and PEs) was reduced to 25%. The current 15% reduced income tax rate for certain
companies in free trade zones was kept.
The income tax rate applicable to non-resident corporations was maintained at 33%
unless otherwise provided for in the statute.
The current general statutory 33% long-term capital gains tax rate for the sale or
exchange of property (including stock in Colombian corporations), was reduced to 10%.
1.2.
8% Net Income tax C.R.E.E
In an effort to reduce the current wage-based tax burden as a job creation incentive, the
elimination of three material employer welfare contributions was introduced, coupling the
statutory income tax rate 8 points reduction, with a new net income tax (C.R.E.E.”). The
C.R.E.E’s rate is 9% for fiscal years 2013, 2014, 2015 and 8% as of fiscal year 2016.
The C.R.E.E does not apply to free trade zone companies currently benefitting from the
15% reduced income tax rate. In the case of foreign entities, they are only subject to the
C.R.E.E on their profits attributable to permanent establishments or branches.
1.3.
PE Taxation.
Before the 2012 tax reform, there was no domestic definition of permanent establishment.
Nevertheless, the PE concept was relevant for Colombian tax purposes given that the
treaties entered into by Colombia (i.e. Spain, Chile, Switzerland, Canada) include a
definition of permanent establishment adopting features of OECD-MC and of the UN-MC
depending on the case.
The 2012 tax reform establishes a definition of permanent establishment inspired on the
PE definition included in the OECD-MC with some specific features: i) The project PE is
not included in the Colombian PE definition, ii) There is not a list indicating which
activities are presumed to be preparatory or auxiliary.
According to the new regulation, both PEs and branches are taxed on the profits
attributable to them considering their assets, activities, functions and risks. Therefore,
transfer-pricing considerations and the elements related with the “OECD report on the
attribution of profits to permanent establishments” are to be considered.
The inclusion of a PE domestic regulation in Colombia has, among others, the following
consequences: (i) certain taxpayers taxed by means of a withholding upon payment
before the 2012 tax reform, will be required to present an income tax return and to have
accounting records following the Colombian GAAP, (ii) considerations regarding transferpricing and PE’s profits attribution will be applicable to both branches and PEs, (iii) The
domestic provisions will facilitate the application of the tax treaties Colombia has entered
A new tax framework for Colombia
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
10 YEARS
into. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that the rules governing PEs under each treaty
should always prevail.
1.4.
Branch profits tax.
In Colombia, in order to avoid domestic economic double taxation, profits are taxable only
at the entity’s level (exemption method) and not at the shareholder’s level. Conversely,
when parts income are not taxed at the entity’s level (e.g. due to tax incentives or due to
differences between the entity’s accounting income and the entity’s taxable income) they
are taxed at the shareholder’s level.
In order to treat Colombian entities and foreign entities’ branches equally, the 2012 tax
reform establishes that transfers of profits from Colombian branches to their home offices
are “deemed dividends”. In consequence, transferring untaxed profits at the branches’
level will trigger Colombian taxation. These rules also apply to PEs. The application of
this rules under the tax treaties Colombia has entered into, should be carefully reviewed,
considering each treaty's particularities.
1.5.
Corporate Residency.
Traditionally, for Colombian Tax purposes, the place of incorporation of an entity and its
corporate domicile, were the sole elements to be considered in order to determine its
residency. The 2012 tax reform brought a very important modification in this regard,
indicating that for an entity to be considered as a Colombian entity one of the following
two criteria should be met: (i) The entity must be incorporated in Colombia and it is
corporate domicile must be in Colombia or (ii) the entity must be “effectively managed” in
Colombia. An entity is managed where the key managing decisions are taken.
Please keep in mind that in Colombia, resident entities are taxed on their worldwide
income while foreign entities and foreign entities´ branches are taxed only on their
Colombian source income.
1.6.
Thin Capitalization Rules.
The 2012 tax reform establishes that only interest derived from indebtedness with an
average value not exceeding three times the entity’s net equity on December 31 of the
preceding year are deductible.
The aforementioned interest deductibility limitation implies, among others, the following
issues: i) it applies on both indebtedness between related parties and indebtedness
between non related parties, ii) it applies on both cross-border inbound indebtedness and
local indebtedness, ii) It does not apply on certain cases (e.g. when the debtor is a bank,
when the loan is obtained to finance infrastructure related with activities considered of
public interest).
A new tax framework for Colombia
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
10 YEARS
1.7.
Tax-Free Reorganizations Redefined
The statutes lacked clarity regarding the treatment of non-cash property transfers to
corporations as capital contributions, while offering an unrestricted tax-free treatment to
all statutory mergers and spin-offs. The 2012 tax reform establishes a reorganizations
chapter with specific anti-avoidance rules to address these issues, in an effort to curtail
M&A transfer strategies that result in acquisitions of corporate assets and businesses in
Colombia that due to current loopholes in the statutes avoided local taxation.
1.7.1.
Tax-Free Capital Contributions of Property
Before the 2012 tax reform, only capital contributions in cash were income tax
neutral while contributions of property could potentially be subject to taxation
upon transfer to a corporation. Due to the lack of regulation, the Colombian Tax
Service has dealt with this situation through a series of cumbersome revenue
rulings that the taxpayer had to navigate in order to mitigate unreasonable
taxation. The new provisions intend to adopt clear rules regulating taxable and
tax-free capital contributions of property.
According to the new applicable rules, unless otherwise provided by the statute,
property transfers to corporations as capital contributions will be deemed taxfree. Therefore, the stock received by the transferor will inherit the tax basis in
the transferred property, while the transferee corporation keeps the same tax
basis in the property that the transferor had.
All capital contributions of property, including stock, where the transferor is a
Colombian national individual or entity and the transferee corporation is an
offshore entity, under the proposed statute (a) will be deemed as taxable without
exception, and (b) must observe transfer pricing rules, regardless of (i) the
existence of a “related-party” relationship between transferor and transferee and
(ii) the value attributed to the contributed property.
1.7.2.
Tax Free Statutory Mergers and Spin-Offs Restricted
In an effort to prevent the use of statutory mergers and spin-offs as a means of
achieving tax-free status for certain acquisitions of corporate assets and
businesses in Colombia, the 2012 tax reform establishes statutory requirements
for these types of reorganizations to qualify for tax-free treatment. In order to
achieve the tax-free treatment, the applicable rules provide for a tax cost roll-over
concerning both the transferred assets and the new shares issued to the
shareholders.
These requirements are somehow similar to those in place in other jurisdictions,
and are based on a continuity of interest (“COI”) and on continuity of business
enterprise (“COBE”), in absence of which the reorganization will not qualify for
tax-free treatment.
In addition to the adoption of COI and COBE requirements, the new statute
differentiates acquisition mergers and spin-offs as opposed to organizational
A new tax framework for Colombia
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
10 YEARS
mergers and spin-offs. For acquisitive reorganizations, the participating entities
are not deemed related-parties under Colombian regulations while in the latter,
the participating entities are deemed related-parties under Colombian
regulations. The difference would be on the adoption of stricter COI and COBE
requirements for the organizational mergers and divisions.
In a reorganization between foreign entities entailing the transfer of assets
located in Colombia, the transfer of the Colombian assets will be deemed as
taxable and will not be eligible for tax-free treatment. In this case, if the
Colombian assets transferred as a result of the reorganization represent 25% or
less of the worldwide combined assets of the participating entities, the resulting
transfer of the Colombian assets could be eligible for tax-free treatment
observing the COI and COBE requirements and related rules as discussed
above.
Already existent, joint and several liability for taxes between the participating
entities in reorganizations, is being restated along with the newly proposed rules.
1.8.
Foreign Tax Credit.
The 2012 tax reform establishes the following amendments to the Colombian foreign tax
credit: (i) the tax paid abroad could be credited against both the income tax and the
C.R.E.E. (ii) foreign individuals considered as Colombian tax residents can benefit from
the foreign tax credit (iii) excess tax credits can be carried forward for 4yr if certain
requirements are met (iv) Certain conditions need to be met in order to benefit from the
foreign indirect tax credit (i.e. shares no granting voting rights cannot benefit from the
credit, a minimum 2yrs holding period is required).
1.9.
General Anti Avoidance Rule (GAAR)
Traditionally, the Colombian tax service has attempted to challenge tax abusive
transactions based on the constitutional principle of substance over form and based on
general law abuse considerations.
The 2012 tax reform establishes a general anti avoidance clause according to which, if
the tax administration manages to prove three of the following elements, the taxpayer will
have the burden of proof in demonstrating that the transaction had a business purpose or
that the prices or considerations related with the transaction meet the Colombian transferpricing rules: i) the transaction involves related parties, ii) the transaction involves a tax
haven, iii) the transaction involves an entity covered by a favorable tax regime, iv) the
price or consideration agreed differs in more than 25% from a fair market value, v) the
transaction does not include a feature, an entity or an agreement common to similar
transactions, with the purpose of obtaining a tax advantage in an abusive manner, If the
taxpayer fails to furnish sufficient evidence of a business purpose or compliance with the
transfer pricing regime, the tax administration can re-characterize the transaction and tax
it.
A new tax framework for Colombia
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
10 YEARS
It is worth noting that the anti avoidance rule, allows the tax administration to pierce the
corporate veil of entities interposed for tax abuse purposes.
1.10.
Depreciation
The tax reform includes the following limits to the decline balance depreciation method: i)
the salvage value cannot be lower than 10% of the asset’s cost, ii) The depreciation rate
cannot be accelerated applying additional shifts.
2.
Income Taxation of Individuals
2.1.
Expatriate Taxation
The 2012 tax reform establishes that Non-Resident Alien individuals (“NRA”) that spend
in Colombia 183 days or more in any 365 day-period, will be deemed as a Colombian
resident for tax purposes and would be taxed on their worldwide income.
The difference, is that in the past an NRA becoming a resident of Colombia was taxed
exclusively on its Colombian source income, while benefiting from an exclusion treating
non-Colombian source income as non-taxable for the first 5-yr. of residency.
2.2.
Minimum Schedular Based Taxation
In an effort to, arguably, simplify individuals’ taxation, the 2012 tax reform adopted an
Alternative Minimum Income Tax System for individuals (the “IMAN”), based on a special
taxable income assessment arrived through the application of restricted statutory
allowances towards the individual’s gross income with rates, in general, lower than those
applicable following the ordinary system.
A simplified version of the IMAN (the “IMAS”) also applies for individuals with a yearly
income inferior to certain thresholds.
Both the IMAN and the IMAS will coexist with the regular income tax assessment method
based on actual income.
3.
VAT.
Income Tax Deduction of VAT Paid in the Acquisition or Import of Capital Assets
According to the 2012 tax reform, the VAT paid upon acquisition or upon import of capita assets
can be creditable against the taxpayer’s income tax. The government by way of an annual decree
will establish the amount of the 16% VAT rate that can be credited.
Finally, section 60 of the tax reform clarifies that this treatment is not applicable in the import of
heavy machinery for basic industries, which will be regulated by pre-existing rules.
A new tax framework for Colombia
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
10 YEARS
4.
Transfer-Pricing.
4.1.
Amendments to the criteria to qualify as a related party for Transfer Pricing issues:
The 2012 tax reform amends the Colombian Tax Code in reference to the criteria for
qualification as a related party for transfer pricing matters. The former rule referred to the
Colombian Commercial Code and to certain sections of the Colombian tax code.
Below please find the main changes made to the criteria to determine when a taxpayer is
considered a related party:
Additional Scenarios for qualification as a related party:
i. When an individual taxpayer or an entity is entitled to receive 50% or more of the profits
of a subordinated entity.
ii. Permanent establishments in regard to the entity whose business they conduct in
whole or in part.
iii. Transactions between related parties through non-related entities.
iv. When more than 50% of the gross revenue comes individually or as a group from its
partners or shareholders.
v. When specific types of association contracts are executed (collaboration agreements,
joint ventures, etc.)
vi. Transactions between Colombian taxpayers and entities located in Free Trade Zones.
Finally, the related party assumption regarding the sale of 50% or more of an entity’s
production to a same company was eliminated.
4.2.
Rules on Business Restructurings
The 2012 tax reform establishes that whenever a Colombian taxpayer transfers functions,
assets or risks to a related party abroad, it is expected to obtain an arm's length
remuneration. This provision is based on the OECD report on business restructurings.
4.3.
Appraisal Method for Sale of Shares Between Related Parties
The 2012 Tax Reform includes an appraisal method for operations of sale of shares (not
publicly traded) between related parties. This method establishes that for determining the
Fair Market Value (FMV) of the shares, common financial methods must be used,
specially the one in which the FMV is calculated through the present value of future
income.
Additionally, this disposition establishes that under no circumstance will the equity or
intrinsic value, be accepted as a valid appraisal method.
A new tax framework for Colombia
10 YEARS
5.
March 18, 2013, yr.10 – No. 22
Anticipated Termination of Current Administrative and Judicial Tax Proceedings.
The tax reform introduces a mechanism for anticipated termination of undergoing tax
proceedings. Sections 147 and 148 of the reform, grant the Colombian tax authorities the ability
to settle with the taxpayer, either the claims that are currently being studied in Court, or those
which are still undergoing administrative review.
This method allows for a settlement of up to 100% of both the penalties and/or accrued interest
owed for the tax matter being discussed. In order to access this mechanism, the taxpayer must
commit to paying the entirety of the tax owed in said dispute. Also, please note that this
mechanism applies only to judicial proceedings initiated before the entry into force of the reform
as well as to administrative proceedings in which notification of the deficiency was served prior to
the enforceability of the law.
Regulation regarding the procedure to follow in order to file for this mechanism is currently being
drafted and is expected to be issued soon. Finally, please keep in mind that taxpayers interested
in adhering to this mechanism must do so before August of this year. Additional consideration
must be given in a case-by-case basis, as specific facts might alter the opportunities of a
successful settlement LW
Colombian_Tax_Flash® is being sent to clients, friends and colleagues of LEWIN & WILLS worldwide,
and contains a legal alert and marketing information. If you do not wish to receive this briefing in the
future, please e-mail us at [email protected] writing the words “Stop Flash” in the
subject.
NOTICE: ©2013 LEWIN & WILLS. All rights reserved. Colombian_Tax_Flash® is a periodical publication
that discusses certain recent tax developments in Colombia. Please be advised that this summary is not
intended to be a detailed and comprehensive description of the topics discussed herein. This publication
is prepared by LEWIN & WILLS (Colombia) for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal
advice. The statements contained herein reflect the author’s interpretation of current tax rules and may
not be shared or accepted by the Colombian Tax Service or by the Colombian Courts or by other persons
or authorities. The information contained herein is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not
constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon it without seeking qualified advice
from professional tax attorneys admitted to practice law in Colombia. This publication was not intended
or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding any taxes or tax
penalties that may be imposed on such person in Colombia or any other jurisdiction. Prior results do not
guarantee a similar outcome. Colombian_Tax_Flash® is copyrighted material, the use, translation,
reproduction or retransmission by any means in whole or in part of its contents is prohibited without the
prior written consent of one of the partners of LEWIN & WILLS.
LEWIN & WILLS – Visit us at: www.lewinywills.com
Postal Address in Colombia: Calle 72 #4-03, Bogota, Colombia
Member of LATAXNET – Latin American Tax & Legal Network – www.lataxnet.net
2014 Tax Reform Bill introduced in
Congress
10 YEARS
October 21, 2014, yr.11 – No. 24
By: Juan Andrés Palacios, Associate, [email protected]
On October 3, 2014, the Colombian Government introduced in Congress the 2014 Tax Reform Bill 134/14
(“2014 Tax Reform Bill”), proposing material changes to already existing taxes, introducing new taxes and
proposing a criminal punishment for the non-disclosure of assets held by taxpayers. The Colombian
Congress is currently considering this Tax Bill and faces the challenge of enacting it before the end of the
year, in order for certain new taxes and modifications of already existing taxes to apply as of January 1st
of 2015.
In this issue, Colombian_Tax_Flash® brings our readership a summary of the following changes that may
be introduced by the 2014 Tax Reform Bill. (i) Wealth Tax creation, (ii) Bank-debits tax prolongation, (iii)
New Regularization Tax for non-disclosed assets or non-existing debts, (iv) Criminal punishment for the
non-disclosure of assets held by taxpayers; and (v) a 3% surcharge over the already existing C.R.E.E
Tax.
Please bear in mind that this is a selective summary for informational purposes only. Therefore, it is not
intended to be a detailed and comprehensive dissertation of the Tax Reform Bill. As a consequence, it is
advisable that our readers do not exclusively rely on this document and thoroughly review the measures
and changes that could affect them, seeking qualified advice from professional tax attorneys duly
admitted to the practice of law in Colombia. It is also important to bear in mind that this briefing considers
the Tax Reform Bill presented by the Government on October 3rd of 2014, and that such Tax Reform Bill
will likely change as it moves forward in its Congressional debates.
The use, translation, reproduction or retransmission by any means in whole or in part of this document is
prohibited without the prior written consent of one of the partners of LEWIN & WILLS. For more
information on these, you can visit us on twitter @colombiatax.
1. Wealth Tax:
The Wealth Tax proposed by the Government through 2014 Tax Reform Bill intends to burden the net
worth of the taxpayers that exceed COP$ 1.000.000.000 (USD$500.000 Approximately) as of January 1st
of 2015 for the years 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Foreign non-residents and non-Colombian entities will
also be subject to the Wealth Tax for their Colombian net-worth either if it is directly owned by the nonresident or non-Colombian entity or through a Colombian branch or Colombian Permanent Establishment.
Regarding the taxable base of the Wealth Tax, certain amounts can be deducted of the net-worth of the
taxpayers according to the 2014 Tax Reform Bill. Among others, the value of the shares or quotas of
Colombian entities held by the taxpayer may be excluded from the net-worth for Wealth Tax purposes.
The Wealth Tax rates proposed by the Colombian Government are the following:
2014 Tax Reform Bill introduced in
Congress
10 YEARS
October 21, 2014, yr.11 – No. 24
Taxable base (net worth with certain allowed deductions)
COP$0-COP$2.000M (USD$1M approximately)
COP$ 2.000M (USD 1M Approximately) – COP$3.000M (USD 1,5M approximately)
COP$
3.000M
(USD
1,5M
Approximately)
–
COP$5.000M
approximately)
COP$ 5.000M (USD 2,5M Approximately) and more
(USD
2,5M
Rate
0,2%
0,35%
0,75%
1,5%
Please bear in mind that every threshold will be taxed with its specific rate. Therefore, if a taxpayer has a
taxable base of COP$5.000M, the first COP$2.000M would be taxed at a rate of 0,2%, the subsequent
COP$1.000 M would be taxed at a rate of 0,35% and the COP$2.000M remaining would be taxed at a
rate of 0,75%.
2. Bank Debits Tax:
The Bank Debits Tax has a current rate of 0,4% over the debits made from banking accounts. This rate
was planed to be diminished to 0,2% for the fiscal year 2015, to 0,1% for the fiscal years 2016 and 2017
and to 0 as of the fiscal year 2018. However, the Government included a provision in the Tax Reform Bill
that aims to maintain the current 0,4% rate for the fiscal years 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 and a gradual
diminishment as of fiscal year 2019.
3. Regularization Tax:
Through the 2014 Tax Reform Bill, the Colombian Government proposed the creation of the
Regularization Tax. This tax intends to burden the assets held by Taxpayers, which have not been
included in prior tax returns in the cases in which the taxpayer was legally obliged to include them and
disregarded such obligation. The taxpayers that decide to file the Regularization Tax return would avoid
possible future penalties for their non-disclosed assets held either in Colombia or abroad. Please bear in
mind that the Government specifically included as possible non-disclosed assets subject to this new tax,
the rights over trusts held abroad and the rights over private foundations, among other type of assets.
The government has proposed rates of 10%, 15% and 20% of the fiscal cost of the non-disclosed assets.
The applicable rate would depend on the fiscal year during which the taxpayer files and pays its
Regularization Tax return. The 10% rate would apply in case of filing and paying during FY2015, the 15%
rate would apply in case of filing and paying during FY2016 and the 20% rate would apply in case of filing
and paying during FY2017.
Please bear in mind that there are other mechanisms currently in place in order to include the nondisclosed assets before January 1st of 2015. The possibility to apply such mechanisms must be reviewed
on a case-by-case basis and we strongly suggest to seek local advise from a tax advisor admitted to
practice in Colombia.
4. Non-disclosure criminal penalty for taxpayers:
Through 2014 Tax Reform Bill the government seeks to give a criminal-level treatment to the nondisclosure, or inexact disclosure of assets with a value greater than 12.966 minimum wages
2014 Tax Reform Bill introduced in
Congress
10 YEARS
October 21, 2014, yr.11 – No. 24
(Approximately USD$4M for 2014). The penalties proposed by the Government go as high as 9 years of
prison and a 20% penalty over the value of the non-disclosed assets.
5. 3% Surcharge of the CREE:
The CREE currently has a temporary rate of 9% over the net income of the taxpayers. If the 2014 Tax
Reform Bill is not approved, the CREE rate would be reduced to 8% as of FY2016. Through the 2014 Tax
Reform Bill the Government has proposed to permanently fix the CREE rate at 9%.
Additionally, the Government proposed the creation of an additional 3% CREE surcharge for the
taxpayers with a net income greater than COP$ 1.000M (approximately USD$500.000) for fiscal years
2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Please bear in mind that even if a company has a net revenue greater than
COP$1.000M, the surcharge would only be applicable for the threshold of profits that exceed
COP$1.000M.
6. “Tax Havens” List update
On October 7 of 2014, the Colombian Government issued Decree 1966. Decree 1966 includes certain
countries to the jurisdictions considered as Tax Havens for Colombian tax purposes. Through Decree
1966, other jurisdictions were excluded from the Tax Havens list. The jurisdictions included as Tax
Havens are:
Panamá (Republic of)*
Qatar (State of)
United Arab Emirates
Kuwait (State of)
Barbados*
*Please note that currently, Panama and Barbados are negotiating the signature of a Tax Information
Exchange Agreement with the Colombian Government that may be signed before January 1st of 2015
(date in which the tax effects triggered by the inclusion of a jurisdiction in the Tax Haven list will become
enforceable). Therefore, Panama and Barbados may be excluded of the Tax Haven list before December
31st of 2014.
On the grounds of the current signature of a Tax Information Exchange treaty with the Colombian
Government, the following 7 jurisdictions were excluded from the Tax Havens list:
Anguila Man
Islands
Virgin British Islands
Cyprus (Republic of)
Principality of Andorra
Bailiwick of Jersey
Principality of Liechtenstein
It is important to bear in mind that the following jurisdictions were temporarily excluded from the Tax
Haven List during 2013 and that their permanent exclusion of the list depended on the signature of a Tax
Information Exchange Treaty that are now currently signed, therefore, the temporary exclusion became
permanent.
Bermuda
Bailiwick of Guernsey
2014 Tax Reform Bill introduced in
Congress
10 YEARS
October 21, 2014, yr.11 – No. 24
The Tax Havens list will be reviewed every year and the exclusion of jurisdictions from the list depends on
the signature of a Tax Information Exchange Agreement with the Colombian Government. Even though
the Decree is effective as of October 7 of 2014, the Tax effects will only be enforced as of January 1st of
2015.
The main effects of considering a jurisdiction as a Tax Haven for Colombian tax purposes are:
Tax Residency for Individuals
Colombian nationals resident in a “tax haven” jurisdiction are deemed Colombian residents for all
Colombian tax purposes (Colombian Tax Code §10).
Increased Withholding Tax Rate for Foreign Portfolio Investors
Foreign Portfolio Investors domiciled in a “tax haven” jurisdiction, are not entitled to the reduced 14%
withholding tax rate on their return. Instead, a 25% withholding tax rate will be levied (CTC§ 18-1(4)(e)).
Increased 33% Withholding Tax Rate on Cross-Border Payments
All cross-border payments of (taxable income items) to beneficiaries that are resident, established,
located, or functioning, in a “tax haven” jurisdiction and except as otherwise indicated in the applicable tax
rules and regulations, are subject to an increased 33% withholding tax rate (CTC§408). Not performing
such withholding on these payments, will result in the loss of the right to deduct the same in the
Colombian payer’s income tax assessment (CTC§124-2).
Transfer Pricing
In addition to a number of related consequences in the area of transfer pricing regulations, transactions
between Colombian parties and parties that are resident, located or domiciled, in a “tax haven” jurisdiction
are by default, subject to the Colombian transfer pricing rules, whether the parties are related or not
(CTC§260-7).
GAAR
A transaction involving in any way or form the use of a “tax haven” jurisdiction is one of the five criteria
required to trigger the statutory General Anti-Avoidance Rule (CTC§§869; 869-1).
Remember that the 2012 tax reform adopted an statutory GAAR requiring the presence of three out of
five criteria to shift the burden of proof from the Colombian Tax Service (DIAN) to the taxpayer in a recharacterization challenge requiring from the taxpayer evidence to support a business purpose or that the
prices or considerations related with the transaction meet Colombian transfer pricing rules.
The Criteria are: (i) the transaction involves related parties: (ii) the transaction involves a tax haven; (iii)
the transaction involves an entity covered by a favorable tax regime; (iv) the price or consideration agreed
differs in more than 25% from a fair market value; and (v) the transaction does not include a feature, an
entity or an agreement common to similar transactions, with the purpose of obtaining a tax advantage in
an abusive manner.
2014 Tax Reform Bill introduced in
Congress
10 YEARS
October 21, 2014, yr.11 – No. 24
Colombian_Tax_Flash® is being sent to clients, friends and colleagues of LEWIN & WILLS worldwide,
aand contains a legal alert and marketing information. If you do not wish to receive this briefing in the
future, please e-mail us at [email protected] writing the words “Stop Flash” in the
subject.
NOTICE: ©2014 LEWIN & WILLS. All rights reserved. Colombian_Tax_Flash® is a periodical publication
that discusses certain recent tax developments in Colombia. Please be advised that this summary is not
intended to be a detailed and comprehensive description of the topics discussed herein. This publication
is prepared by LEWIN & WILLS (Colombia) for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal
advice. The statements contained herein reflect the author’s interpretation of current tax rules and may
not be shared or accepted by the Colombian Tax Service or by the Colombian Courts or by other persons
or authorities. The information contained herein is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not
constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon it without seeking qualified advice
from professional tax attorneys admitted to practice law in Colombia. This publication was not intended
or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding any taxes or tax
penalties that may be imposed on such person in Colombia or any other jurisdiction. Prior results do not
guarantee a similar outcome. Colombian_Tax_Flash® is copyrighted material, the use, translation,
reproduction or retransmission by any means in whole or in part of its contents is prohibited without the
prior written consent of one of the partners of LEWIN & WILLS.
LEWIN & WILLS – Visit us at: www.lewinywills.com
Postal Address in Colombia: Calle 72 #4-03, Bogota, Colombia
Member of LATAXNET – Latin American Tax & Legal Network – www.lataxnet.net
VENEZUELA
Incentivos y Desincentivos
Fiscales sobre Inversiones Extranjeras
En Venezuela
Incentivos & Desincentivos

Situación Actual:

PIB creció 1,4% / 2013

Deficit Fiscal de 17,2% PIB
/2013

Reducción Reservas
Internacionales – 21 MMM
USD /servicio 7 MMM Oct

Bonos RBV (tasas / 12%)

S&P CCC+ (RBV 27)
Incentivos & Desincentivos

Situación Petróleo

96% de Exportaciones (> 60% PIB /2014)

Reducción de Producción / Inversiones 302 MMM USD /5 años
Incentivos & Desincentivos
 Indicadores Inversión

Inflación (56,3%?) 2013

Devaluación (3 Tipos de
Cambio)

Control Cambiario

Seguridad Jurídica
Incentivos & Desincentivos
 Situación Impositiva

La LISLR no ha sufrido modificaciones desde 2007

Igual caso para LIVA

Expansión significativa de las Contribuciones Parafiscales
(incremento en la regresividad)

Las modificaciones resultan de cambios de criterio de la
Administración Tributaria / Tribunales ALTO RIESGO
Incentivos & Desincentivos
 Situación Impositiva

Venezuela no participa en el Foro Global para la
Transparencia Fiscal

No hay participación en esfuerzos OCDE BEPS

No forma parte de la lista de gobiernos que han avanzado
esfuerzos para la firma de un IGA bajo FATCA

Presenta problemas prácticos importantes en aplicación de
Convenios para evitar la Doble Imposición
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
 Incentivos Fiscales:

Rebajas de Impuesto

Estabilidad / LPPI y RLPPI

Ineficiencias
 Rebajas o Exoneraciones de ISLR
 Exenciones de IVA.
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales

Incentivos Fiscales:

Otorgados ampliamente en el último decenio.

Difícilmente mantienen un equilibrio entre las partes ante variaciones en rentabilidad o
cambios en precio de fungibles (commodities).

Resultan Ineficientes
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
 Incentivos Fiscales vs Certeza

Inversionistas Prefieren Claridad

Falta de Predictibilidad Afecta Rentabilidad de Proyectos

Otros Aspectos a Tomar en Cuenta
IMPUESTO
Impuesto sobre la renta de
las compañías
Impuesto
al
Activo
Empresarial
Impuestos Municipales
Retención de impuestos
Ajuste por Inflación (inicial)
Ajuste por Inflación (anual)
Depreciación fiscal
Costos
preoperativos
distintos de gastos de capital
(excluye intereses)
PREMISA DEL CASO BASE
34% sobre toda la renta, menos gastos (depósitos
de gas no asociado)
No se aplica desde octubre de 2004
SENSIBILIDADES
34% sobre toda la renta, menos gastos,
3%, sobre ingresos brutos, debe cuidarse el efecto
de múltiple imposición industrial, comercial y
servicios, así como en materia de retenciones.
Dividendos: véase más abajo
Retenciones sobre contratistas no ubicados en
el Municipio, comúnmente el efecto se traslada
a la empresa.
Se necesita tratado con país sede,
Intereses a una Institución Financiera No Calificada:
34% sobre el 95%
Intereses a una Institución Financiera Calificada:
4,95%
Honorarios de Asistencia Técnica: 10,2%
Honorarios de servicios técnicos: 17%
Ajuste inicial realizado sobre todo el activo y pasivo
no monetario
Tributo de 3% exigible únicamente sobre el ajuste
relacionado con el activo fijo depreciable
Ajuste efectuado al cierre del balance general del
primer año, siendo calculada la depreciación sobre
el balance ajustado por inflación
La inflación es calculada desde la fecha de la
inversión original.
El ajuste incluido en la renta gravable para cada
año del año siguiente al de la primera producción.
Si el proyecto es financiado con patrimonio, lo más
probable es que el ajuste por inflación (API) no
resulte en ingresos/pérdidas fantasma; si el
proyecto es financiado con deuda (divisas),
probablemente surjan ingresos/pérdidas fantasma.
Las divisas no realizadas deben reconocerse a fin
de año para fines del API.
UOP o línea recta. Otros métodos aceptados previa
autorización de la administración tributaria
Capitalizar y depreciar durante 5 años a partir del
año de la primera producción
Se necesita tratado con país sede
SENIAT ha considerado que las posiciones y
activos/pasivos en divisas (digamos, deudas)
únicamente debe reconocerse tras su
realización, lo cual conllevaría mayores
pasivos desde el punto de vista del API.
Se llevan a gastos en su totalidad durante el
año de la primera producción
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
IMPUESTO
Tenencias y Derechos u
Obligaciones en Divisas
Costos preoperativos de
intereses, distintos de
gastos de capital
PREMISA DEL CASO BASE
Reconocibles/deducibles según sean realizadas
Costos
de
operativos
intereses
Se llevan a gastos en la medida en que son
incurridos
Algunas veces la autoridad tributaria
considera que el neteo o los abonos a
cuenta no son deducibles.
Honorarios por servicios
técnicos y otros costos
de partes relacionadas
Deducibles, en tanto y en cuanto no hubiese
disponibilidad de los mismos en el país.
Deducibles incluso de ser pagados a
una parte relacionada y aun en el país
si proveedor cuenta con CDI.
Costos de expatriados
Deducibles, pero las limitaciones conforme a la LOT
establecen un techo a la proporción de
extranjeros/locales para la deducción de la
compensación, no se aceptan prestaciones sociales
Desgravamen sujeto a limitaciones,
pero se aceptan las prestaciones
sociales a fines del computo.
Rebajas fiscales por
nuevas
inversiones
(Normales)
Lapso de rebajas fiscales por nuevas inversiones en
la LISLR culminado (es decir, plazo de 5 años no es
renovado)
Créditos fiscales por
inversiones ambientales
No hay créditos fiscales por inversiones ambientales
(es decir, plazo de 5 años no es renovado)
Rebajas
fiscales
por
nuevas
inversiones se conceden conforme a
Decreto. Rebajas en Materia Turística y
Naviera.
Los créditos fiscales por inversiones
ambientales se conceden conforme a
Decreto
Traslado de
operativa neta
Trasladables a los siguientes 3 años
Se utilizan antes de las pérdidas inflacionarias
(costos históricos)
Sin indexar
Se utilizan después de las pérdidas
inflacionarias
Indexadas
Pérdidas inflacionarias
Trasladables por un año
Se utilizan después de las pérdidas operativas
netas
Sin indexar
Se utilizan antes de las pérdidas
operativas netas
Impuesto
a
los
dividendos
(como
impuesto de igualación)
34% sobre la diferencia (exceso) entre las
ganancias anuales según libros antes del impuesto
y la renta gravable atribuible a dividendos pagados.
No se reintegran las diferencias negativas.
Prueba anual, no acumulativa
Contabilidad según la DPC 10
Sensibilidades del tratado fiscal al
modelo/conforme a la tasa más
reducido o sin retenciones de
impuestos.
pérdida
SENSIBILIDADES
Capitalizar todos y reconocer durante 5 años a partir
del año de la primera producción
Contabilidad sobre montos históricos
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales
IMPUESTO
PREMISA DEL CASO BASE
IVA operativo
CERTs emitidos sobre un % prorrateado de las
ventas de exportación a las ventas totales
Factor de descuento de 15% para reflejar tanto la
demora en la emisión de CERTs y el % de
descuento en la venta de CERTs
Todas las ventas de exportación son exentas del
IVA (tasa cero)
Tasa de IVA de 15%
IVA – Costos
Preoperativos
80% reembolsado (siendo el 20% compensado tras
la primera producción)
Factor de descuento de 15% para reflejar tanto la
demora en la emisión de los CERTs y el % de
descuento en la venta de CERTs
Tasa de IVA de 15%, pagado encima de tributos,
etc.
Timbre fiscal
Pago único de 1% sobre el patrimonio (valor a la par
del capital inscrito)
Aporte a la Ciencia &
Tecnología (LOCTI)
0.5% sobre el volumen de negocios
Impuesto
a
Transacciones
Financieras (ITF)
N/A.
Impuestos
derechos
etc.
las
aduanales,
portuarios,
20% aplicado a todo el activo
SENSIBILIDADES
95% reembolsado, 5% compensado tras
la primera producción (véase límites de
recuperación operativa)
En caso de calificar las actividades e
inversiones
propias
del
proyecto,
entonces se reduce la carga
0% aplicado a todo el activo
Incentivos & Desincentivos
 Aspectos Críticos

Identificación del Tipo de Cambio Aplicable / Op. Alternativas

Consecuencias Fiscales / tipo de Cambio – ISLR, IVA,
Aduanas

Determinaciones / expropiaciones

IVA / retenciones y devolución “tasa cero”

Impuestos Municipales
Incentivos y Desincentivos Fiscales

Estabilidad:

Impuestos (por su naturaleza no gozan de intangibilidad).

Alternativa: Ley de Promoción y Protección de Inversiones (LPPI) por
medio de un Contrato de Estabilidad Jurídica.

Alternativa: Forum shopping / CDI.

Flexibilidad

Impuestos (por su naturaleza general, difícil). Alternativas: Mecanismos de
Ajuste o Recaptura o Exoneraciones parciales.
OBRIGADO!
Juan C. Garantón B.
PERU
PERU
¿Dónde estamos?
¿A dónde vamos?
Agenda
¿Dónde estamos?
• Sistema Tributario
• BEPS
• Precios de Transferencia
• Promoción de Inversiones
¿A dónde vamos?
• Política Fiscal
• Desafíos y Riesgos
Sistema Tributario
Impuesto a la Renta (IR)
• Renta devengada: 30%
• Dividendos
: 4.1% x (100 – 30) = 3%
• Tasa combinada : 33%
• (+) utilidades a Ws
: 5% a 10%
• Base NIC’s + NIIF’s
• Algunas limitaciones
• Algunas prohibiciones
• Arrastre de pérdidas
IR No Residentes
• 30%
Regalías
• 30%
Servicio digital
• 15%
Asesoría técnica
• 30%
Sólo renta en el Perú
renta dentro/fuera del Perú
• 4.99% Interés no vinculado
Impuesto al Valor Agregado
(IVA  IGV)
• Impuesto General a las Ventas: 18%
• Algunas exoneraciones
• IVA  costo adicional
• Contabilidad separada/prorrata
• Devolución por exportación
• Recuperación anticipada en inversiones
El cobro anticipado del IVA
•
Retención al 3% (sólo compradores calificados)  afecta al vendedor.
100
-
•
14.46
3.54
Resta competitividad a compradores calificados. ¿Discriminatorio?
Percepción al 2% (sólo vendedores + productos calificados)  afecta al comprador.
100
•
+
+
18
+
2.36
Pago a cuenta del futuro IVA en la reventa proyectada.  IVA al consumidor final
Detracción al 12% (sólo servicios calificados)  afecta al vendedor.
100
-
+
3.84
14.16
Resta competitividad a determinados servicios: ¿Confiscatorio?
Base Erosion and Profit Shifting
• Normas antielusivas específicas
• Norma antielusiva general
• Controlled Foreign Companies (Reglas CFC)
• Transferencia indirecta de activos
• ITF (Impuesto a las Transacciones Financieras)
Normas Antielusivas Específicas
Distribución Utilidades
Escenario Base
Capital
900
Utilidades
100
Patrimonio
1,000
1
2
3
Capital
900
900
Utilidades
100
(100)

Patrimonio
1,000
(100)
900
4.1%
Capitalización Utilidades
Reducción de Capital
1
2
3
Capital
900
+100
1,000
Utilidades
100
(100)

Patrimonio
1,000

1,000
Capital
Utilidades
1
2
3
1,000
(100)
900



1,000
(100)
900
0% vs 4.1%
Norma Antielusiva General
La Administración Tributaria (Sunat) puede exigir la deuda
tributaria cuando se evite total o parcialmente el hecho
imponible mediante actos:
(a) que individual o conjuntamente sean artificiosos o
impropios para conseguir el resultado obtenido; y,
(b) que los efectos jurídicos o económicos sean similares a
los que se hubiesen obtenido con los actos usuales o
propios, salvo el ahorro tributario.
Norma XVI Código Tributario
Texto no literal
Nueva Lógica
• Sustancia antes que forma
• Redefinición de los “derechos del contribuyente”
• Verdadero riesgo: conocimiento del negocio
• Requiere: alta capacidad de auditores/jueces
• Requiere: alta institucionalidad
Transferencia indirecta de activos
Off Shore
 ABC
100
A:
B:
C:
ABC
K
100
Por venta de activos en Perú
 100
IR 30%
 (antes) por venta de acciones de off shore
IR: 30% (ahora) por ventas de acciones de off shore
Reglas CFC
Reglas CFC
Controlled Foreign
Companies
A
B
Sin
Con
Planeamiento planeamiento
C
Reglas CFC
 Crédito
D
Reglas CFC
 Crédito
Negocios en el exterior
Utilidad
(IR)
Disponible
100
(30)
70
100
(30)
70
100
(30)
70
100
(30)
70
70

70
70

70
70

70
70

70
70
(21)

49
-.-
70
(21)

49
70
(30)1+ (3)
+301
67
Vehículos Off Shore
Rendimiento
(IR)
Disponible
Repatriación del
inversionista
Repatriación
(IR)
(+) Crédito IR
Disponible
1
El 30% del IR no se calcula sobre “70” sino sobre “100” cuando se reconoce el “crédito indirecto”
ITF
Impuesto a las Transacciones Financieras
La data por ITF
ITF
CUENTA BANCARIA
Fecha
Abono
Cargo
Saldo
Tasa:
0.005%
US$1
US$0.00005
US$20,000
US$1.00
US$100,000
US$5.00
El problema
Ingresos detectados
Rentas declaradas
Total
1’000,000
800,000
200,000
1’000,000
(250,000)
Otros ingresos declarados
(30,000)
Rentas no declaradas
720,000
Contabilidad para personas naturales
Fecha
Remunera
ciones
Alquileres
Cobro
Préstamos
Fondo/
Rescate
Interbancos
Anticipo
Herencia
?
Total
Total
250,000
30,000
20,000
300,000
200,000
150,000
50,000
1’000,000
Precios de Transferencia
Evolución
A
C
D
Métodos
OCDE
OCDE
+ 6to. Método
Vinculadas exterior
Alcance
Paraísos fiscales
Vinculadas locales
+ IVA
DJ
Estudio
+ operaciones gratuitas
No
No Reglamento
+ operaciones gratuitas
No
No
Si
Si
Si
Si
¿En dónde estamos?
1. IVA
3. Operaciones gratuitas
2. Operaciones locales
4. “6to. Método”
El “6to método”
• Condiciones: commodities + 3ro sin sustancia
Vinculado
Exterior
Local


3ro.
• Base presunta
• Márgenes vs Precios
Ajustes (Roll Back)
Reglas
Q x P = Cotización

(-) Impurezas del concentrado
(-) Servicios de refinación
(-) Fletes y seguros
(-) Primas de negociación
Producto
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alambrón
Cátodo
Cobre RAF
LME
Cobre Blister
Eje
Concentrado
Factores
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Calidad del producto
Fecha del contrato
Tipo de contrato (Spot vs Suministro)
Mercado de destino
Puerto de entrega
Términos de entrega
Volumen
Forma de pago
Promoción de Inversiones
Doing Business  no necesariamente tax
 Política fiscal  Marco macroeconómico
 Convenio de estabilidad
 Libre conversión moneda extranjera
 Liberación de tasas arancelarias
X Convenios para evitar doble tributación
X Baja institucionalidad
Tax  Promoción de Inversiones
• Contabilidad en moneda extranjera
• Aceleración de depreciaciones
• Recuperación anticipada IVA
• Import Temporal
La Política Fiscal
¡Un buen padre (madre) de familia!
Perú: ¿dónde estamos?
• Presupuesto público : 70% Tax + 30% “casi” Tax
• ¿Cuánto gano?
: 16% PBI
¿Cuánto me falta?
 2% para Salud
¿De dónde?
4% Evasión IVA
 2% para Educación
 2% para Justicia
 Programas sociales
2% Exoneración ineficiente IR
2.5% Gestión de Gasto
 Infraestructura
¿Cómo vamos?

Crecimiento: 5.5% PBI

Inflación: 2%

Export (China – Cobre – Oro)

Deuda Pública: 20% PBI

Reservas internacionales: 32.5% PBI
¿Cómo lo hacemos?
 Presupuesto financiado
•
•
•
•
-1% PBI como límite
 gasto público en elecciones
Marco multianual (5 años)
Fondo de Estabilización Fiscal
 Transferencia del Sector Privado
•
•
•
Obras por Impuestos
APP (Asociaciones Público Privadas)
Concesiones
AL: ¿A dónde vamos?
• Tax como commodities
• Estandarización IR + IVA
• CDI’s
• BEPS
• Common Law vs. Civil Law o Realidad vs Forma
• ¿Derechos de los Contribuyentes?
• El gran riesgo: Gasto social
• Contagio por Región: AL vs. EU
• Robin Hood o el falso dilema de pobres vs. ricos
¡Obrigado!
César Luna-Victoria
[email protected]
(51-1-) 208-3000 x 329
(51) 945-094-557
E.U.A.
The “Flat” World
Where geographies are increasingly connected,
providing increased competitive opportunities and threats.
• Global suply chain ( and cross-border movement of
goods and services).
• Use of integrated systems, workflow, outsourcing and
offshoring.
• Ongoing need to become even more productive.
Friedman Thomas L, (2007) The world is Flat 3.0: A Brief
History of the Twenty-First Century. Farrar, Starus and
Giroux.
The “VUCA” World
• “Vuca” – U.S. Military term used to express the combined Volatility,
Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity of conditions and Situations.
Within the Latin American Tax environment, we see:
• Volatility – pace of change in tax regulations, but also in the workforce
• Uncertainty – economic trends, political situations and tax policies
• Complexity – inter-linkages of tax policies within countries and crossborders; inter-linkage of various tax matters with each other
• Ambiguity – lack of clarity or transparency with respect to authorities
intents, interpretations and and applications of regulations.
The “AFAK”
“All Facts Are Known” - World
While the external environments is “VUCA”, Taxpayers need to recognize
that increasingly all facts are known about us.
• Increasing digitization and linkage of financial records (e.g., Brazil SPED –
the public digital bookkeeping system)
• Increasing cross-border exchange of information, with a lot more to come
with FATCA, starting on July 1st, 2014.
• Increasing number and depth of audits and increased coordination of audits
across tax types.
• Increased public scrutiny of effective tax rates (and tax structures) of public
companies.
• More ways for news to travel further and faster.
VARIETY IS THE SPICE
OF LIFE
Tax is the top business
threat to growth in today’s
economy.
Tax transparency and Tax
morality
continue
to
.
overshadow and influence tax
regulation around the world
Tax Law is local but
companies are global.
When considering their corporate
tax policy over the next 1 to 5 years,
companies should consider the
following three (3.) important factors:
1)Tax optimization,
2)Tax risk and control, and
3)Tax Communications.
On Octorber 10th, 2014 the
Finance Commission of the Italian
Chamber of Rejuties approved the
text for the Voluntary Disclosure
and Money Lanndering Draft Law.
Ireland to “phase out” the
Double irish Strategy used by
multinational
companies
announced on October 23th, 2014.
More Americans Renounce
their U.S. Citizluship, with 2014
on Pace for a Record.
Modalidades da
Informações Fiscais:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Troca
de
Troca de informações mediante solicitação formal;
Troca de informações espontânea;
Troca de informações automática (ou sistemática);
Troca de informações setorial;
Fiscalizações ou verificações fiscais simultânea; e
Vistoria de representantes autorizados pelas autoridades
competentes.
MinHacienda anuncia que Colombia será pionera en
intercambio automático de información tributaria
Bogotá 27 de octubre de 2014 (COMH). El próximo 29 de octubre el
Gobierno de Colombia suscribirá em Alemania, tras una invitación del
Ministro Federal de Hacienda de Alemania, Wolfgang Scháuble, y del
Presidente del Foro Global para la Transparencia Tributaria, Kosie Louw, un
acuerdo multilateral por médio del cual 45 países se comprometen a
intercambiar información tributária de manera anual y automática a partir de
2017. Otros 20 países iniciarán el intercambio automático a partir de 2018.
“Esta herramienta nos permitirá recibir anualmente información de las
entidades financieras de todos los países que se han unido al acuerdo. Será
una pieza clave en nuestra lucha contra evasión fiscal, porque permitirá
identificar activos e inversiones financieras que ciudadanos colombianos
tengan en el exterior y no hayan declarado ante la DIAN. En esos casos,
dichos ciudadanos enfrentarán sanciones y hacia adelante deberán pagar
impuestos por esos activos”, explico el funcionário.
La lista de naciones que compartirán información tributaria de manera
automática com Colombia incluye a los Estados Unidos, los países de la Zona
Euro, el Reino Unido, China, India, Sudáfrica, Argentina, Brasil, Chile
México e incluso países que hasta hace poco eran considerados paraísos
fiscales como Andorra, Anguila, Bermuda, Islas Caimán, Islas Virgenes
Britanicas Y Liechtenstein.
“LA OCDE ya desarrolló el mecanismo tecnológico estandarizado a través
del cual se intercambiará la información automaticamente. El trabajo ahora se
centrará em homogeneizar el reparto de información a través de los distintos
países y em implementar la herramienta como tal”, agregó el jefe de la cartera
de Hacienda.
Así mismo, el Ministro Cárdenas recordo que este acuerdo se suma a la
extensa trayectoria de Colombia em la lucha contra la evasión fiscal
internacional.
En especial, destacó que la DIAN podrá comenzar el intercambio
no automático de información tributaria con una lista aún más
extensa de países a partir del primero de enero de 2015 gracias a la
Convención para la Asistencia Mutua de Administración
Tribrutaria, ratificada por Colombia em marzo de este año.

similar documents