SPOT rules in the mining sector are modified.- As reported in our previous newsletter, Superintendence Resolution No. 086-2025/SUNAT modified Superintendence Resolution No. 183-2004/SUNAT, which approves the rules for the application of the SPOT. Among other provisions, it was established that, as of April 1, 2025, the transfer of gold minerals and their concentrates taxed with the IGV (heading SPN 2616.90.10.00), as well as non-auriferous metallic minerals of Chapter 26 of Section V of the Customs Tariff 2022, qualify as an operation subject to deduction, which must be deposited prior to the transfer.
Likewise, days later, within the framework of the National Deputy Superintendence Resolution No. 013-2017-SUNAT/700000, SUNAT communicated through its social networks that taxpayers would have 60 days to adapt to the new provisions on the transfer of metallic gold-bearing and non-gold-bearing minerals. This term will expire on May 30, 2025.
Within this framework, on April 16, 2025, Resolution of Superintendence No. 121-2025/SUNAT was published, which incorporates a new complementary provision to the mentioned Resolution No. 086-2025/SUNAT, to exclude from SPOT the transfer of unprocessed minerals included in the national subheadings of Chapter 26 of Section V of the Customs Tariff 2022, when such transfer is made prior to its entry to the plant, which effectively provides the service of benefit of metallic minerals taxed with the IGV.
The regulations for the VAT tax refund under Law No. 31666, Law for the Promotion of Aquaculture are established.- Supreme Decree No. 065-2025-EF, published on April 10, 2025, approves the Regulations for the VAT tax refund provided for in Law No. 31666.
It establishes the following:
The maximum amount of Selective Consumption Tax (ISC) refund is determined for those who provide land transportation services.- Through Superintendence Resolution No. 000128-2025/SUNAT, published on April 18, 2025, the percentage to determine the maximum amount of ISC refund referred to in the Regulation of Emergency Decree No. 012-2019 is approved:
CUADRO
Various aspects of the Law for the promotion of the textile sector.- With Report No. 034-2025-SUNAT/7T0000, SUNAT analyzes Law No. 31969, Law that promotes competitiveness and employment in the textile, clothing, agricultural and irrigation, agro-export and agro-industrial sectors, encouraging their economic reactivation. In relation to the textile and apparel sectors, SUNAT points out the following:
In order to comply with the capitalization of the reinvested amount, domiciled taxpayers who are not authorized to keep accounts in foreign currency and carry out their operations in the country in such currency (set as functional currency), must consider the profit reflected in the books and records related to tax matters, kept in local currency.
In order to obtain the credit for reinvestment in infrastructure, machinery and equipment made from January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024, the requirement of capital increase of the profit (after payment of income tax) obtained in 2024 for the amount effectively reinvested does not necessarily have to be fulfilled at the time of submitting the reinvestment program to the Ministry of Production, that is, until the last business day of January 2025.
The depreciation rates of 33.33% (for fiscal years 2024 and 2025) and 20% (for fiscal years 2026, 2027 and 2028) established in the Law are maximum percentages to which the subjects included in the special machinery and equipment depreciation regime for the textile and apparel sectors may have access and, therefore, rates lower than 20% and 33.33% may be applied, provided that they are higher than 10%.
In accordance with Article 17 of the Regulations of Law 31969, in the event of an accounting depreciation lower than that resulting from the application of the 10% rate (provided for in Article 22 of the LIR Regulations), the depreciation of machinery and equipment is accepted for tax purposes at the rates of 33.33% and 20%, as established in the aforementioned law.
It is not possible to access simultaneously to the benefit referred to the additional deduction for the hiring of workers for the textile and apparel sectors, provided in Article 7 of Law 31969 and the benefit of additional deduction for the employment of disabled persons, established by paragraph z) of Article 37 of the Income Tax Law
SUNAT should not disregard the computable cost of shares acquired through capitalization of credits, for not proving the use of means of payment (RTF No. 01790-9-2025).- The taxpayer made several loans in favor of a foreign company, and later capitalized these credits, thus acquiring the shares of said company. When he requested the certificate of recovery of invested capital, SUNAT did not recognize most of the computable cost of the shares, stating that the use of means of payment in the disbursements made had not been accredited. However, the disbursements observed actually corresponded to the transfers made by the taxpayer as a loan to the foreign company and these were not the transactions through which the shares were acquired.
Therefore, the Tax Court stated that it is not appropriate for SUNAT to require the accreditation of the use of means of payment according to the regulation provided in the Sole Ordered Text of Law No. 28194, given that the shares of the company were acquired through the capitalization of credits and not with the delivery of money. (Criteria included in RTFs No. 14024-3-2014, 10034-3-2023 and 01447-9-2024).
Qualification as a permanent establishment (RTF No. 0890-12-2025).- In this case, SUNAT rejected the deduction of expenses derived from the construction service rendered by a Brazilian company. This was on the grounds that: 1) the service was neither reliable nor causal; and, 2) the service was rendered for more than 6 months, which would have constituted a permanent establishment that obliged the user of the service to obtain payment vouchers issued under the Peruvian rules of the Payment Vouchers Regulation.
For its part, the taxpayer stated that it was not obliged to verify whether its foreign supplier qualified as a permanent establishment, being that its only obligation consisted of making the corresponding withholding and ensuring that it received a payment voucher containing the minimum information established in Article 51 of the LIR.
The Tax Court dismissed the objection stating that: 1) it was contradictory to formulate an objection alleging that the service is neither reliable nor causal at the same time; and, 2) SUNAT did not support from when the taxpayer would be required to collect payment vouchers issued in accordance with the Payment Vouchers Regulation nor which would be the rules that would require it to ‘verify if its supplier is going to set up a permanent establishment’.
Undue documentary support in the application of the Benefit Test (RTF No. 02374-4-2025).- The taxpayer provides commercial air transportation services of passengers, cargo and correspondence. In 2017, it received logistics services, interline commissions for air traffic, administrative services, financial advisory services, among others, from its related companies abroad.
The Administration rejected the deduction of the costs and expenses derived from such services, due to the fact that the ‘benefit test’ had not been met, since: 1) no documentation on the costs and expenses incurred by the suppliers of the services had been presented; and, 2) because the reasonable criteria for the allocation of such costs and expenses had not been documented either. The legal basis applied by SUNAT was Article 32-A, paragraph i), of the LIR, which has been in force since 2017.
The Tax Court confirmed the objection stating that: 1) some of the contracts specified that the remuneration was fixed based on the costs and expenses incurred by the supplier, so it was necessary to know what those expenses were; 2) the services under analysis required ‘human capital intervention’, which made it necessary to prove their cost by identifying the assigned personnel involved in providing the service, the time assigned (exclusive or shared with other related parties), the function performed, among others. 3) the taxpayer did not present documentation of the costs and expenses incurred by the service providers, nor the criteria for their allocation.
Deduction of expenses for incentive for the incorporation of a new company without incentive policy (RTF No. 1553-9-2025).- The Tax Court affirms that the amount of money granted to the workers with the purpose of promoting the incorporation of a new company, in attention to the mutual decision of the extinction of the labor relationship, is deductible regardless of whether the employer has a policy, plan or incentive program that promotes the incorporation of a new company or that accredits the compliance with the purpose of Article 47 of the Labor Training and Promotion Law; since such requirements are not derived from the provisions of the referred Article 47, in accordance with paragraph a) of Article 18 of the LIR.
