Costa Rica

Mexico

Peru

CHILE

COLOMBIA

Costa Rica

Withholding Tax on Capital Gains and Losses from Real Estate, Use of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Form, and Application of the 20% Reduction Established in Law No. 9996

Resolution No. MH-DGT-RES-0039-2025, dated 17.09.2025 (SCOPE NO 118 TO GAZETTE NO 173)

Establishment of a 2% withholding tax on capital gains from the transfer of real property by residents

• A duty of retention is established 2% on Capital Gains and Losses Tax.
• Applies specifically in cases of transfer of real estate that can be registered in the National Registry.
• Ownership of the property must belong to a person domiciled in the country.
• This measure aims to ensure the advance collection of taxes, guaranteeing that the State has resources available for property transfer operations.

2.5% Withholding Tax on Capital Gains from the Transfer of Real Property by Non-Residents

• In accordance with the Income Tax Law, a withholding duty is set at 2,5%.
• Apply in cases where the owner of the real estate is a non-resident.
• The difference in tax treatment based on the seller's tax residency is recognized.
• This withholding is established as a mechanism that simplifies control and ensures compliance with obligations by foreign taxpayers.

Retention obligation

• The acquirer of the real estate is designated as Holding agent.
• Be obligated to withhold, settle, and pay the corresponding tax.
• This mechanism allows the Tax Administration to delegate the collection responsibility to the buyer, who acts as an intermediary.
• Strengthen legal certainty and ensure that taxes associated with transfers are collected more efficiently.

Taxable base and exemptions

• The tax base for the withholding is defined based on the value of the real estate transfer.
• There are assumptions under which they apply exemptions, Depending on the nature of the transaction or specific legal provisions.
• These exemptions aim to prevent double taxation and recognize situations in which the transfer does not generate a real gain for the taxpayer.
• Clarity on the tax base and exemptions is key for correct tax application.

Modification of Form D-120

• The form is being renamed to “Real Estate Transfer Tax”.
• This modification more accurately reflects the object of the tax.
• The name update contributes to transparency and clear identification of the tax liability.

Exoneration cases

• The new form implements specific checkboxes: “Exemption percentage” y “Exemption (exempt amount)”
• These boxes facilitate the recording of tax benefits granted by the regulations.
• The measure ensures that the Administration can clearly distinguish between taxable amounts and exempt amounts, preventing errors in tax calculation.

Forms for self-assessment and payment

• The use of a form called “Capital Gains Withholding – Non-Resident”.
• This form will be used for the self-assessment and payment of obligations related to non-resident taxpayers.
• The implementation of this specific document allows for differentiated tax treatment based on tax residency, ensuring greater administrative order.

Form availability

• All forms will be available in the system TRIBU-CR.
• It is warned that statements submitted in other formats will not be considered valid.
• This provision seeks to standardize tax compliance methods and ensure the correct processing of information in the Tax Administration's systems.

Submission and payment deadline

• Specific deadlines are set for the Presentation and payment of the withholding statements and the transfer tax.
• These deadlines are binding and aim to ensure the regularity of compliance with tax obligations.
• The measure allows the State to have financial resources in a timely manner, avoiding delays in collection.

Means of payment for tax obligations

• Payments shall be made by Banking interconnection, real-time debit or other mechanisms authorized by the Administration.
• The use of electronic means is prioritized to expedite compliance.
• This ensures security, traceability of operations, and reduction of administrative errors.

Payment verification for National Registry registration

• The National Registry You have the obligation to verify the payment of taxes before registering any real estate transfer.
• This means that an operation cannot be registered if the tax obligation has not been met.
• This ensures a direct relationship between registry legality and tax compliance, strengthening state control.

Taxpayer liability for late filing

• The taxpayer will be responsible for filing late returns.
• In case of default, you will be liable solidary along with other individuals who may be linked to the operation.
• A framework of shared responsibility is established that discourages non-compliance and protects the tax interest.

Derogatory

• The previous resolution (N°DGT-R-028-2013) is hereby repealed.
• This repeal ensures there is no regulatory conflict.
• This updates the legal framework in accordance with the new provisions.

Unique Transitional

• The retention of 2% for direct debit customers will only take effect when the Tax Administration makes the corresponding forms available.
• This transitional regime guarantees that taxpayers have access to the necessary instruments to comply with the obligation before it becomes enforceable.
• The provision reflects a phased approach to the application of the standard.

Validity

• The law comes into effect on October 6, 2025.

Mexico

Preliminary injunction in amparo –Impropriety regarding the rules related to the deadline for canceling Electronic Tax Receipts (CFDI) in the current legislation for the fiscal year 2025.

Federal Judicial Weekly, Regional Plenary Sessions, Thesis: PR.A.C.CN. J/9 K (11th), published on 08/18/2025.

Facts

The Circuit Collegiate Courts issued conflicting criteria regarding the admissibility of the stay against:

• Article 22, section VI, of the 2025 Revenue Law.
• Article 29-A, fourth paragraph, 81 fraction XLVI, and 82 fraction XLII of the Federal Fiscal Code.
• Rule 2.7.1.46 of the Miscellaneous Tax Resolution for 2025.

A court held that the injunction should be denied on grounds of public order and social interest. Another court, however, invoked the *amparo en revisión* 683/2023 by the Second Chamber of the SCJN, where the unconstitutionality of Article 29-A was declared, and affirmed that the injunction is granted under the principle of the appearance of good law.

Legal criterion

The Regional Plenary in Administrative and Civil Matters of the Central-Northern Region, based in Mexico City, determined that the suspension it is inadmissible against the indicated rules.

Justification

1. Normative substitution of the term
   • Article 22, section VI, establishes a new deadline for the 2025 fiscal year, which replaces the one provided in Article 29-A.
   • Under this regime, CFDI can be canceled no later than the last day of the month in which the annual income tax return must be filed.
2. Public order and social interest character
   • The existence of a deadline stems from the need to ensure the traceability of transactions carried out by taxpayers.
   • The lack of a time limit for canceling CFDI makes it difficult to verify proper compliance with tax obligations.
   • This verification is of direct interest to the public, as it ensures adequate tax collection.
3. Interest weighting in suspension
   • Based on Articles 128 and 138 of the Amparo Law, the impact on the social interest and public order must be weighed against the principle of the appearance of good right.
   • The Plenary determined that the appearance of good law must give way, since the impact on taxpayers by restricting their right to cancel CFDI is of lesser magnitude than the impact on the collective in general if fiscal verification is hindered.
4. Constitutionality of the New Deadline
   • The deadline established in Article 22, Section VI, don't repeat the unconstitutional vice that he had been warned in the protection appeal 683/2023.
   • It also does not incur the problematic issue recognized in jurisprudential thesis 1a./J. 23/2025 (11a.) of the First Chamber of the SCJN.

Peru

Seizure powers over funds released from withholding accounts

REPORT No. 000100-2025-SUNAT/7T0000, dated 09.15.2025.

1. Purpose of the SPOT and nature of the deposited funds

1.1 Purpose of the SPOT: In accordance with paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of Article 2 of the SPOT Law, the purpose of this system is to generate funds for the payment of tax debts. Such debts include taxes, fines, advance payments, and payments on account of taxes administered or collected by SUNAT. These funds are constituted through deposits that taxpayers are required to make into special accounts opened at Banco de la Nación.

1.2 Character of deposited amounts: Numeral 8.1 of Article 8 of the SPOT Law establishes that deposits made into said bank accounts are considered intangible and unseizable. Their use is restricted to the purposes set forth in Article 9. These amounts retain their condition of being intangible and unseizable until the Banco de la Nación authorizes their free availability or proceeds with the refund. However, the regulation also provides for an exception: in enforced collection proceedings for the tax debts indicated in numeral 2.1 of Article 2, SUNAT may use the funds to effect collection, even resorting to prior precautionary measures in accordance with the Tax Code.

1.3 Account Holder Obligation: Subsection 9.1 of the same article provides that the account holder must use the deposited amounts to pay his or her tax debts, whether as a taxpayer or a liable party, as specified in Article 2 of the Law.

1.4 Options Once Obligations Have Been Fulfilled: According to section 9.2, once tax obligations have been met, if there are balances in the account, the account holder may choose to request the free disposal of said funds or, failing that, use them to make new deposits as provided for in Article 2. If free disposal is requested, the Banco de la Nación will consider the deposits as freely available, applying the procedure established by SUNAT.

1.5 Conclusion on SPOT's Operation: As can be appreciated, the SPOT is a mechanism by which taxpayers make deposits into accounts at the Banco de la Nación to ensure compliance with their tax obligations. These funds remain intangible and unseizable, except in cases where coercive collection proceedings have been initiated by SUNAT. Once the obligations have been met, the holder may choose to dispose of the remaining balance, following the procedure established by the Tax Administration.

2. Application procedure for free disposal of deposits

2.1 Issuance of resolution by SUNAT: Subsection (c) of paragraph 25.3 of Article 25 of Superintendency Resolution No. 183-2004/SUNAT states that, once compliance with the relevant requirements has been verified, SUNAT must issue a resolution approving or denying the taxpayer’s request for free disposal. Said resolution shall be notified in accordance with the provisions of Article 104 of the Tax Code.

2.2 Time limit for release: Subparagraphs (d) and (e) of the same paragraph provide that, if an approval decision is issued, the applicant must complete the release within fifteen (15) business days following notification. Furthermore, on that same date, SUNAT will notify Banco de la Nación of the approved applications, expressly indicating the maximum time frame available to the applicant to make the payment.

2.3 Loss of Intangible and Unattachable Character: Accordingly, funds deposited in withholding accounts for which unrestricted access has been approved cease to be exempt from seizure as of the start of the period granted to the taxpayer to release the funds. This means that the loss of protection takes effect on the business day following the date on which the decision approving the request was notified.

2.4 Seizure Powers of Officials Other Than SUNAT: Consequently, it must be concluded that the officials authorized to order the seizure of bank funds—other than SUNAT’s enforcement officers—are empowered to order seizures in the form of withholdings from the affected taxpayer’s withholding account, effective as of the business day following notification of the decision approving the request for release.

3. General scope of loss of unattachability

3.1 General Application of the Standard: The legal provisions that regulate the loss of the unattachable status of funds deposited in deduction accounts have general scope. This means that their application is not limited to a specific coercive collection procedure, but is enforceable in any proceeding where an attachment order on released funds is appropriate.

3.2 Powers of enforcement officers other than SUNAT: In light of this, enforcement officers other than SUNAT, in the exercise of the powers conferred by the TUO of Law No. 26979 (Law of Coercive Execution Procedure) and the Tax Code itself, are authorized to order attachment by way of retention on funds deposited in de-merit accounts.

3.3 Condition for Levy to Proceed: It is an indispensable requirement that the funds have previously lost their unattachable character, which occurs after the issuance and notification of a favorable resolution approving the request for the release of said funds.

4. Ownership of the withholding account and notification of seizures

4.1 Account Ownership and NatureThe funds from the deduction account are deposited into an account opened at the Bank of the Nation and are the exclusive property of the taxpayer. These funds form part of their assets and are intended for the payment of tax obligations.

4.2 Account Usage Limitations: While the use of the detraction account is restricted by legal provision, these limitations do not imply that SUNAT has direct control over the account. Rather, they are limitations imposed by regulations to ensure compliance with tax obligations.

4.3 Condition of funds once released: Once the funds are released, they become resources entirely at the disposal of their owner. Since it is an account opened at the Bank of the Nation, which is part of the financial system, this institution is responsible for the administration and custody of the released funds.

4.4 Competence to notify seizure measures: Therefore, it is concluded that a resolution ordering an embargo on released funds should not be notified to SUNAT, but directly to the Banco de la Nación. This is because the Tax Administration does not have the authority to issue orders regarding the use of amounts that have already been released.

CONCLUSIONS:

The competent official to order seizure measures on funds deposited in bank accounts, other than the coercive enforcers designated by SUNAT, is authorized to order the seizure in the form of retention of amounts released from the taxpayer's account of deductions, as of the business day following the day on which the notification of the resolution approving the release request is made.

2. Coercive enforcers other than SUNAT, in the exercise of coercive powers conferred by the Sole Consolidated Text of Law No. 26979, Law of Coercive Enforcement Procedure, as well as by the Tax Code, are authorized to order seizures in the form of retention of funds deposited in de-merit accounts, provided that these have lost their non-seizable status as a consequence of a favorable resolution having been issued and notified approving a request for fund release.

A resolution ordering an attachment order on funds released from the deduction account opened at the Bank of the Nation must be notified to the aforementioned banking institution.

CHILE

Temporary Reduction in Corporate Income Tax (IDPC) Rates and Monthly Provisional Payments for SMEs (Law No. 21.755)

Circular No. 53 dated 09/03/2025.

On July 11, 2025, Law No. 21,755 (hereinafter, “the Law”) was published in the Official Gazette, which introduced various amendments aimed at simplifying regulation and promoting economic activity. Among its most relevant provisions, the twenty-fifth article established a temporary reduction in the first-category tax rate for businesses under the simplified tax regime for small and medium-sized enterprises contemplated in letter D) of article 14 of the same law.

Additionally, a temporary reduction in the rate of monthly provisional payments (PPM) was ordered for benefiting taxpayers. To access these reduced rates, at the end of each fiscal year, the contribution percentage established in the fourth transitional article of Law No. 21,735 must be met, in accordance with what is indicated in the first paragraph of the twenty-fifth article of the Law.

The purpose of the circular is to provide instructions on these modifications and their effective date.

Temporary reduction in the corporate income tax rate

1.1. Rate Reduction

Article twenty-fifth of the Law reduced the IDPC rate, set in Article 20 of the LIR, to the following levels:

• 12,5% during the 2025, 2026, and 2027 fiscal years.
• 15% during the 2028 trading year.

This represents a significant reduction compared to the permanent rate of 25% applicable to taxpayers under the pro-SME regime contained in letter D) of Article 14 of the LIR.

1.2. Beneficiary Taxpayers

The benefit applies to companies registered under the pro-SME regime of No. 3 of letter D) under Article 14 of the Income Tax Law (LIR), provided they comply with the contribution percentages established in Transitory Article 4 of Law No. 21,735. These percentages are 1%, 3.5%, 4.25%, and 5%, respectively, for the years 2025 through 2028.

Compliance with this requirement is.

Rate and Quote Application Table:

Commercial Year	Implementation of Law 21.735	Quote	Reduced IDPC Rate
2025	August 2025	1%	12,5%
2026	August 2026	3,5%	12,5%
2027	August 2027	4,25%	12,5%
2028	August 2028	5%	15%

It should be specified that SMEs opting for the optional tax transparency regime (No. 8 of letter D) (of Article 14 of the LIR) do not benefit, as they are exempt from Income Tax.

1.3. Credit for IDPC

The temporary reduction of the IDPC also affects the credit established in Articles 56 No. 3 and 63 of the LIR, which is allocated to withdrawals, remittances, or distributions subject to final taxes.

The credit will correspond to the lower value enter

a) The amount resulting from applying the credit factor to retirement, remittance, or distribution.
b) The available balance in the SAC register.

The credit factor It is determined by dividing the current IDPC rate by the difference between 100% and that rate.

• 2025–2027: IDPC rate = 12.5% → Factor = 0.142857.
• 2028: IDPC rate = 15% → Factor = 0.176470.

In the case of utilities accrued as of December 31, 2016, the calculation of the credit is not altered, as it is applied in accordance with the transitional regime of Law No. 20,780.

1.4. Special situations related to the reduction of the Corporate Income Tax (IDPC)

1.4.1. Maximum limit on the TEF factor

Paragraph 9 of the eleventh transitional article of Law No. 21,210 establishes that the TEF factor may not exceed the value calculated using the permanent IDPC rate (25%), even if the rate is temporarily reduced to 12.5% or 15%.

1.4.2. Credit for Article 33 bis of the LIR

SMEs under the tax transparency regime (No. 8 of Section D) do not pay IDPC, but are entitled to the credit provided for in Article 33 bis of the Income Tax Law. To calculate this, the reduced rate of 12.5% or 15% must be used, as applicable.

Article 41 A LIR Credit

The foreign tax credit, which can be applied against the IDPC, is also calculated using the reduced rates of 12.5% or 15%.

In the case of credit distribution to homeowners, the applicable rate will be the difference between the 35% and the current IDPC rate.

Summary:

Commercial Year	IDPC Rate	Difference from 35% (IPE Credit Rate)
2025–2027	12,5%	22,5%
2028	15%	20%

2. Transient decrease in PPM rate

2.1. Benefited taxpayers

The PPM reduction applies to the same taxpayers who receive the IDPC rebate: SMEs No. 3 of letter D) from Article 14 of the LIR. It does not apply to those under the fiscal transparency regime.

2.2. Scope of the decrease

Under the permanent rule, PPM must be paid at rates of 0.25% or 0.5%, depending on income. Under the temporary reduction, the rates are cut in half for 2025–2027:

• Start of activities: 0,125%.
• Income ≤ 50,000 UF: 0,125%.
• Income > 50,000 UF: 0,25%.

2.3. Validity of the reduction

The discount applies to income earned from August 2025 (to declare oneself in September) up to the income of December 2027 (to be declared in January 2028). No reduced PPM rate was established for fiscal year 2028.

Validity of the provisions

• IDPC DiscountEffective January 1, 2025, applicable to tax years 2026 and thereafter.
• PPM DiscountIt is effective from the September 2025 declaration (for August income) and extends until January 2028 (for December 2027 income).

COLOMBIA

Nullity of DIAN's acts for imposing a requirement not provided for in Articles 616-1 and 496 of the Tax Statute

Council of State, Fourth Section, Judgment of 08/06/2025, Record No. 30166.

Request for annulment by the plaintiff

The plaintiff requested the annulment of the administrative acts issued by the DIAN. The main basis for their claim is that the entity imposed an additional requirement not provided for by law for the deductibility of VAT. This requirement consisted of the electronic receipt notifications for the electronic invoice and for the goods or services acquired having to be sent prior to the request for the deductible tax.
The plaintiff alleged that this requirement constitutes an overreach of functions by DIAN and directly violates the principle of legality.

Defense of DIAN

DIAN explained that there is no violation of the principle of legality nor overreach in its functions. According to the entity, its administrative acts do not add any regulatory element to Article 616-1 of the Tax Statute (ET).

On the contrary, he maintained that the opportunity to forward electronic messages provided for in subsection 10 of Article 616-1 of the ET should be understood in harmony with the deadlines set in Article 496 of the same statute.

In this way, the controversy focused on the interpretation of both articles: 616-1 (requirements for electronic invoices as fiscal support for credit operations) and 496 (conditions for the deductibility of VAT).

DIAN's position in the challenged acts

In the accused acts, DIAN established that, for the VAT deduction to be valid, the invoice issuer must receive the electronic acknowledgment of receipt of the invoice and the delivery of goods or services messages within the same fiscal period.
The entity argued that this interpretation was valid within its powers, in accordance with Article 56 of Decree 1742 of 2020, which grants it the authority to interpret tax regulations and issue opinions or administrative acts.

Principle of Tax Legality and Limits of the DIAN

Although the DIAN has the authority to interpret tax regulations, this authority does not allow it to modify, restrict, or expand the content of those regulations. Tax legality, established in Article 338 of the Constitution, implies that only the law can create, modify, or extinguish fiscal obligations, including the conditions for accessing benefits such as deductible VAT.

The case law of the Council of State and the Constitutional Court has reiterated that concepts or administrative acts of the DIAN cannot impose additional requirements beyond those established by the legislator.

Normative content of Article 616-1 of the ET

Paragraph 10 of Article 616-1 of the Tax Code stipulates that, in credit operations, the electronic invoice can only serve as fiscal support if the buyer confirms to the issuer the receipt of both the invoice and the acquired goods or services through electronic messages.
However, the norm just set a specific deadline to send such messages nor expressly conditions the deductibility of the tax on them being sent before requesting it.

Regulatory content of Article 496 of the ET

Article 496 of the Tax Statute regulates the deadlines for accounting for deductions and deductible taxes, differentiating between those responsible on a bimonthly basis, quarterly basis, and the construction sector.

• Biannual Deductions and deductible taxes can be accounted for in the accrual period or in the following three periods, provided they are claimed in the return for the period in which they were accounted for.
• Quarterly It is permitted to account for it in the accrual period or in the following quarter, also by requesting it in the corresponding declaration.
• Construction Deductible VAT can only be accounted for in the accrual period or the two subsequent periods, and must be claimed in the tax return for the period in which the real estate unit is registered.

None of these assumptions state that electronic receipt messages must be sent within a specific timeframe or prior to the request for deductible VAT.

Purpose of the reform introduced by Law 2155 of 2021

The confirmation of receipts was established through Article 13 of Law 2155 of 2021. However, the explanatory memorandum shows that the objective of the rule was to strengthen traceability and tax control through the consolidation of electronic invoicing, not to condition the deductibility of VAT on the prior sending of electronic messages.

The aims of the reform were:

1. Strengthening the DIAN's tax information system and auditing capacity.
2. Consolidate the electronic invoice as the central tax support document.
3. Expand the use of electronic documents to support revenue, costs, and expenses.

Denaturation of the purpose of the standard

The DIAN's interpretation would imply that the omission of the prior acknowledgment entails the automatic loss of the right to deductible VAT. However, this lacks legal basis and distorts the purpose of Law 2155 of 2021, whose objective was to strengthen control mechanisms and not to condition tax benefits to additional deadlines.

DIAN overreach and violation of the principle of legality

The DIAN, through the contested acts, required that the acknowledgments of receipt be made before the filing of the VAT return. This contradicts Article 28 of the Tax Statute (ET) on the principle of accounting accrual, according to which income, deductions, and deductible taxes are recognized in the period in which they are accrued.
The Chamber concludes that the DIAN exceeded its powers by imposing a requirement not contemplated in either Article 616-1 or 496 of the Tax Statute, violating the principle of tax legality.

Final Decision and Conclusion

1. The nullity of the challenged administrative acts must be declared, as the DIAN exceeded its interpretative power and attributed competencies that belong to the legislator.
2. No costs are awarded, in accordance with Article 188 of the CPACA.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Council of State, Fourth Section, resolved to declare the nullity of the contested acts, reaffirming that DIAN cannot demand additional requirements to those established by law for the recognition of deductible VAT.