This possible modification generates mixed reactions. Therefore, as pointed out by a company in the financial sector, “There are firms that are interested in quantifying the deduction and there are those that are convenient for deducting 100% in the same year.”
“This is because the impact of the adjustment for inflation has different effects depending on the type of balance sheet that the companies have. Those companies in which the monetary asset is greater than the monetary liability (for example, banks), are exposed to the impact of inflation and this generates a loss that can be deducted from the tax, therefore, they would pay less and have the capacity to reinvest. that fiscal saving”, they detailed.
“Companies that have more monetary liabilities than monetary assets, on the contrary, are making a profit as a result of inflation, therefore, they should pay more. These companies have more incentives to prorate that payment since they are taxed on the profits generated by the effect of inflation”, they added.
Analysis
“If you go back to the regime of prorate in thirds the result of the effect of inflationthere will be big losers, which are generally SMEs; and some winners, which are those with a lot of monetary liabilities”, explained a tax expert to Ámbito.
“That is to say that for many SMEs, in a large part of their assets, inflation has a devastating effect: credits, availabilities, exchange goods. Then, all this generates a loss to inflation. Of course, like any loss, it is not the same to take it in a single year than to take it in three years: in three years, the effect of the deduction evaporates. And generally, there are many more who have losses due to inflation than those who have gains due to inflation”, assured the expert.
On the other hand, the tax expert pointed out that this measure would allow the Government to add in collection: “Instead of considering a loss in a single year, which lowers the collection of Profits, it is imputed in three years. With which, there are two thirds that are going to take it in the next two years. For example: a loss of 120, if I take it all at once, I deduct 120 million. Now, if I have to take in thirds, I deduct 40. A year, those 40 is less purchasing power”.
Another point to take into account is the legal aspect: “There are already jurisprudencefrom when the thirds were in force, where if as a consequence of computing in thirds the tax of the year becomes confiscatorythe jurisprudence ruled andIn some cases this affects the right of private property. So if they approve it, there’s going to be a lot of judicialization of this issue, by those who lose with inflation”.
Source: Ambito
David William is a talented author who has made a name for himself in the world of writing. He is a professional author who writes on a wide range of topics, from general interest to opinion news. David is currently working as a writer at 24 hours worlds where he brings his unique perspective and in-depth research to his articles, making them both informative and engaging.
