MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Jesús Aldrin Rojas, Miguel Ángel García Piña and Esteban Ollervides Toribio, QCG Transfer Pricing
payer’s ability to provide detailed documentation. As a result, while there are no formal prohibitions, APAs are generally more viable for taxpayers with complex organisational structures or significant international operations. It is also important to note that maquiladora compa - nies previously had the option to request APAs under a specific methodology. However, this option has been progressively phased out, with the 2024 fiscal year being the last year in which APAs for maquilado - ras were accepted. From the 2025 fiscal year onward, maquiladora companies are required to apply the safe harbour method exclusively (see 11.1 Transfer Pricing Safe Harbours ). In summary, while there are no strict legal limitations on access to an APA in Mexico, eligibility is subject to a case-by-case evaluation by the SAT based on the nature and complexity of the taxpayer’s operations. In addition, even after an APA is issued, the tax author - ity may subsequently review the resolution through a lesividad judgment. In such cases, the SAT may nullify the APA if it concludes that the agreement was issued in error or to the detriment of the tax authorities. 7.5 APA Application Deadlines In the Mexican regulatory framework, APAs are pri - marily governed by Article 34-A of the Federal Tax Code and specific rules outlined in the current Miscel - laneous Tax Resolution (MTR). Taxpayers must submit their APA request no later than 30 June of the fiscal year immediately following the first fiscal year intended to be covered by the agree - ment (in accordance with Article 34-A, sixth paragraph of the CFF, and Rule 3.9.1.5 of the MTR 2026). Differences Between Unilateral, Bilateral and Multilateral APAs In all cases, the objective of APAs is to provide prior legal certainty regarding the tax treatment of transac - tions between related parties, under the arm’s length principle. Unilateral APA This is agreed exclusively between the taxpayer and the SAT. It applies only for tax purposes in Mexico and
does not ensure the elimination of potential double taxation if the other country does not make a corre - sponding adjustment. Bilateral APA This involves the SAT and the tax administration of another country with which Mexico has a double taxa - tion treaty. It requires the activation of a Mutual Agree - ment Procedure (MAP) under Article 25 of the relevant treaty. It allows for the co-ordination of adjustments in both jurisdictions, thereby eliminating double taxation. Multilateral APA This involves the SAT and more than one foreign tax administration, applicable to complex multinational structures with operations in multiple jurisdictions. It is processed through simultaneous or co-ordinated mutual agreement procedures. 7.6 APA User Fees In Mexico, taxpayers who request an Advance Pricing Agreement are required to pay certain fees in accord - ance with the Federal Rights Law. Under Article 53 G of the Federal Rights Law, a fee of MXN 310,246.79 must be paid for the review and processing of each request for a resolution relating to prices, consideration amounts, or profit margins in transactions between related parties. In addition, pursuant to Article 53 H of the same law, a fee of MXN 65,049.36 is payable for each annual review conducted in connection with the agreement. These fees apply for the 2025 fiscal year and are reflected in the updated version of the Federal Rights Law published by the Mexican Chamber of Deputies. 7.7 Duration of APA Cover APAs may be valid regarding the fiscal year in which they are requested, the immediately preceding year, and for up to three fiscal years following that in which they are requested. APAs may be valid for a longer period when they stem from a MAP in accordance with an international convention to which Mexico is a party.
152 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook