Recently, the Tax Administration Service (“SAT”) has implemented a massive dissemination strategy by sending invitation letters or communications via email related to alleged operations carried out by taxpayers with specialized service providers whose Specialized Services or Specialized Works Providers Registry (“REPSE”) is canceled. These SAT letters or communications aim to promote voluntary self-correction by taxpayers under the terms provided by articles 33, section IV, subsections b) and c), and 63 of the Federal Tax Code (“CFF”), emphasizing that only specialized service providers with an active registration in REPSE can issue Internet Digital Tax Receipts (“CFDI”) that are tax-deductible for Income Tax (“ISR”) purposes and creditable for Value Added Tax (“IVA”) purposes.
Recently, the Tax Administration Service (“SAT”) has implemented a massive dissemination strategy by sending invitation letters or communications via email related to alleged operations carried out by taxpayers with specialized service providers whose Specialized Services or Specialized Works Providers Registry (“REPSE”) is canceled. These SAT letters or communications aim to promote voluntary self-correction by taxpayers under the terms provided by articles 33, section IV, subsections b) and c), and 63 of the Federal Tax Code (“CFF”), emphasizing that only specialized service providers with an active registration in REPSE can issue Internet Digital Tax Receipts (“CFDI”) that are tax-deductible for Income Tax (“ISR”) purposes and creditable for Value Added Tax (“IVA”) purposes.
I. Legal Nature of SAT Invitation Letters
According to the criteria issued by the Federal Judiciary (jurisprudences 2a./J. 62/2013 and PC.III.A. J/59 A (10a.), these invitation letters constitute only declarative and non-definitive acts; that is, they do not generate immediate obligations, do not directly affect the taxpayer's legal sphere, and therefore, are not challengeable through administrative litigation, since they do not determine any amount to be paid, do not establish specific rights or sanctions, nor do they constitute final or definitive resolutions issued by the tax authority. It is important to note that according to article 42 of the Federal Tax Code, tax authorities are empowered to verify the proper fulfillment of taxpayers' tax obligations through the exercise of their verification powers, such as desk reviews, home visits, or electronic reviews.
Therefore, it must be considered that only through the formal exercise of verification powers, respecting the principle of legality, through a written act by a competent authority duly founded, motivated, and notified, could the tax authority require the necessary information to verify that taxpayers, jointly liable parties, and third parties related to them have complied with tax and customs provisions and, if applicable, determine omitted contributions or tax credits, as well as verify the commission of tax crimes and provide information to other tax authorities. However, it must be considered that formal audits conducted by SAT usually represent high costs for the federal government, mainly due to the time, human, and material resources invested in each individual review. In this sense, preventive actions such as invitation letters are especially attractive to SAT, as they imply significantly lower costs compared to traditional auditing procedures such as home visits or desk reviews.
Moreover, this strategy allows SAT to focus its human and technical resources on specific cases where tax inconsistencies are significant, reducing the operational burden derived from unnecessary audits and optimizing the allocation of institutional resources.
II. Tax Obligations Regarding Subcontracting of Specialized Services
According to article 15-D of the CFF, it is essential that payments for subcontracting specialized services do not form part of the social purpose or the predominant economic activity of the beneficiary of such services for them to have tax deduction or credit effects. In this regard, article 27, section V, of the ISR Law provides that payments for the provision of specialized services may be deductible as long as the contractor verifies that the contractor is registered in the REPSE at the time of payment, obtains a copy of the CFDI for wages, has the bank receipt of withholdings made, and ensures compliance with the payment of contributions to IMSS and INFONAVIT.
For its part, according to section II of article 5 of the IVA Law, such provision of specialized services may be creditable as long as the contractor verifies that the contractor has its registration in the REPSE, obtains a copy of the declaration and the corresponding IVA payment.
III. Practical Analysis of SAT's Strategy (Use of Technology and Digital Information)
This SAT action is part of its current preventive audit strategy, based on the intensive use of technology, artificial intelligence, and systemic analysis of large volumes of information (big data). That is, regardless of the taxpayer's response to the invitation letter, the tax authority has permanent and direct access to detailed information, such as issued and received invoicing (CFDI), tax returns, payments made, and information provided by related third parties (banks, clients, suppliers), integrated into the so-called Unique Tax File (“EFU”).
Therefore, SAT can relatively easily perform automatic data cross-checks to identify providers with canceled REPSE registration and eventually proceed to deep surveillance, audits, and electronic reviews or presumptive determinations of tax credits according to article 55 of the CFF.
IV. Specific Tax Implications Derived from Operations with Canceled REPSE Providers
In terms of articles 15 of the Federal Labor Law; 27, section V of the ISR Law; and 5, section II of the IVA Law, for the purposes of ISR deduction and IVA credit, it is an indispensable requirement that the specialized service provider has a valid registration in the REPSE
