Executive Summary:
- In August 2022, the Plenary Session of the Sixteenth Circuit on Administrative Matters resolved that the figure of compensation applicable in civil law is not a means of payment to credit VAT. Until now, it was a mandatory criterion only in the state of Guanajuato.
- A Collegiate Court in the State of Coahuila issued a thesis to the effect that there is no legal prohibition to consider creditable and effectively paid the VAT that is transferred between individuals that has compensation as its origin.
- On March 15, 2023, the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation will resolve the conflict of criteria. A decision that will be binding throughout the country.
In August 2022, the jurisprudence issued by the Plenary Session on Administrative Matters of the Sixteenth Circuit was published, through which it resolved that, for the purposes of analyzing the admissibility of a request for a refund of a credit balance, the figure of compensation applicable in civil law is not a means of payment to credit the value added tax.
This criterion is mandatory only in the state of Guanajuato, causing many companies in that region to stop using compensation as a means of payment, which has affected their operation and business model with clients and suppliers.
However, a Collegiate Court in the State of Coahuila, when resolving two direct amparos, issued a thesis to the effect that there is no legal prohibition to consider creditable and effectively paid the value added tax that is transferred between individuals by virtue of operations carried out between them that have compensation as their origin.
Given the contradiction of both criteria, the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation will be responsible for making the final decision on March 15 on whether compensation is a means of payment for VAT and, therefore, whether when using this method it is possible or not to credit the tax or request a refund of the balances generated. This decision will be mandatory throughout the country.
If the Supreme Court does resolve this situation, its ruling will be of great importance, since the compensation figure is used by many companies that would be affected if the criterion that is currently only mandatory in the state of Guanajuato were followed.
The consequences of such a resolution must be analyzed in each particular case, especially the harmful impact it may have on inter-company operations, for example, in a centralized treasury, loans, among others.
The Santamarina + Steta Tax team is at your service to provide you with the necessary advice.
