At Lógica we maintain that the provinces are obliged to adhere to the Consumer Fiscal Transparency Regime, whether by law or provincial decree. There is an invitation from the Nation, yes. But, unlike other invitations, this is for the provinces to fulfill two constitutional mandates to which they are obliged. Therefore it is an “invitation-exhortation”.
The question arises as to whether the provinces have the power or, more than that, the obligation to adhere to the Consumer Tax Transparency Regime. From Lógica we maintain that the provinces are obliged to adhere to the Regimeespecially by application of two provisions of the National Constitution.
Under this Regime that we have promoted from Lógica, sellers must inform consumers of the taxes that affect the formation of prices and that are borne in their purchases. It was sanctioned with Law 27,743 and regulated with RG 5614 of ARCA. The law requires the VAT and other indirect national taxes to be displayed and invites the provinces to join to make gross income and municipal taxes visible. The application will be gradual. Since January 1st it applies to large companies, starting with VAT and internal taxes; other national taxes should be added in the future. And from April 1st, other businesses must join. By that second date, the provinces should join, so that the Regime is fully applied, for all businesses and for all national, provincial and municipal taxes.
From the invitation to the provinces, it would seem that they are not obliged. But from Lógica we maintain that the adhesion of the provinces to the Regime is mandatory for the following reasons and, especially, for the first two:
- A first constitutional provision is applied. The National Constitution, which is above the law, in its article 42, provides that consumers have the right “to adequate and truthful information.” Note this contradiction. On the one hand, the legislator understands that providing nutritional data is basic consumer information (art. 61 inc ‘a’ Law 24,240). Thus, the State requires companies to inform the consumer in detail, for example, 1% sodium, 0.8% sugars and 1.5% saturated fats. But, on the other hand, when the national, provincial or municipal State “eats” our taxes, it has hidden that the tax burden exceeds 40% and even more than 50% of the final price, including gross income and municipal taxes, with rates that they reach 5% or more in each case. It is unacceptable that tax information continues to be hidden from the consumer.
- A second constitutional provision applies. The same article 42 provides that the authorities must provide “education for consumption.” At Lógica we maintain that the “fiscal tragedy” due to which our country came to have the highest taxes and inflation in the world, a reflection of the lack of control of public spending during the last two decades, has as one of the main causes the lack of education or fiscal culture of our entire society, as a result of a regime that systematically hid taxes from citizens. This concealment was done through prohibitions and sanctions for showing VAT that do not exist in the world, as well as through taxes on the seller and the other links in the production chain, then transferred to the consumer, without informing them. Given the very serious consequences of this scheme that took away tax education from the consumer, it is necessary to reverse this situation through a tax regime of maximum transparency at the three levels of the State.
- Provincial or municipal fiscal power is not affected. This Regime does not create or eliminate taxes, which is why it is not a strictly tax law, but rather a consumer protection law. Information is only provided to the citizen. In fact, in the draft that circulated in December 2023, the regime was planned as a modification to the Consumer Protection Law, specifically to chapter XVI “Consumer Education.” Said law has a concurrent competent authority of the nation and the provinces, which is why it could have been enacted in one go (as in the Brazilian precedent), without the need for the provinces to adhere to it. Since taxes are not modified, the rule is that now a provincial law of accession is not even necessary, a decree from the provincial executive branch is sufficient.
- Governors owe it to consumers. Unlike the cases in which a provincial accession can mean the loss of provincial fiscal resources (for example, accession to the RIGI, money laundering, fiscal consensus, etc.), in favor or not of the Nation, here the accession does not neither benefits nor harms the Nation. Non-adherence would not be against the national government, but against the citizens who, according to surveys, 94% want to see taxes on the tickets (Poliarchy), being the only ones who lose (information) due to such eventual refusal by the governors.
- The information must be as homogeneous as possible throughout the country. It would not be logical or acceptable that, in certain provinces, citizens receive the maximum tax information available at the three levels of government, while in other provinces only national taxes are displayed. And that asymmetry would be caused by a governor who, contrary to two norms of the Constitution, decides not to adhere to the Regime.
- Non-adherence to the Regime does not prevent voluntary exposure. Accession serves to make the Regime mandatory for sellers. But, even when a province does not adhere, sellers have the option of showing gross income and municipal taxes, as in fact it has emerged that some supermarkets are already doing so. It would be scandalous if the provincial authorities dictated a new specific rule (like the one that once existed at the national level) to sanction those who want to tell the tax truth to their clients. Times have changed and it would have a high political cost.
- In an election year, joining or not can add or subtract votes. From the provincial ruling party, accession can be used in its favor, and from the opposition, non-accession can be highlighted against it.
For all of which, At Lógica we maintain that the provinces are obliged to adhere to the Consumer Fiscal Transparency Regime, whether by law or provincial decree. There is an invitation from the Nation, yes. But, unlike other invitations, this is for the provinces to fulfill two constitutional mandates to which they are obliged. Therefore it is an “invitation-exhortation”. And, if they don’t adhere, sellers can still voluntarily display gross receipts and municipal taxes on the tickets.
So far, five provinces have sent bills to join the Regime. They are CABA, Province of Buenos Aires (2 projects), La Pampa, Santa Fe and Rio Negro. In total, six projects, all from the opposition to the respective provincial government. From Lógica we sent letters to the 24 governors asking whether or not they are going to adhere to the Regime and whether or not, as long as they do not adhere, they are going to apply sanctions to sellers who display local taxes. We will make the respective responses and adhesions (or not) known through the Lógica networks, by other widely disseminated media and, where appropriate, by public means. Lógica has offered to civil society entities in the provinces to carry out coordinated actions for these purposes.
President of Lógica, an NGO dedicated to generating tax awareness in society
Source: Ambito
I am a 24-year-old writer and journalist who has been working in the news industry for the past two years. I write primarily about market news, so if you’re looking for insights into what’s going on in the stock market or economic indicators, you’ve come to the right place. I also dabble in writing articles on lifestyle trends and pop culture news.
