Transparency of national taxes to the consumer, and the provincial ones, how and when?

The measure constitutes an important first step by making the final consumer aware of the amount of indirect taxes and the tax effort made in each purchase. All of this, without prejudice to the fact that in the future there may be greater detail regarding transferable taxes that must be recorded separately.

Provinces and CABA

Now, one of the recitals of the general resolution cited recalls that through the law: “…the provinces and the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires were invited to dictate the respective regulations so that final consumers are aware of the incidence of the Tax on “Gross Income and the respective municipal taxes in the formation of the prices of goods, locations and provision of services.”

Strictly speaking, the sanctioned legal text definitely contains this invitation but does not establish how or the ways in which it should be detailed. And this can bring inconveniences if criteria are not unified.

It’s not that it hasn’t been tried. In the draft law known in December 2023, the relevant article (39) of the VAT was reformulated, but transparency regarding the incidence of taxes (national, provincial and municipal) was proposed to be regulated through modifications to Defense Law 24,240 of the Consumer, which was finally not sent for parliamentary discussion. Although it is not invalidated as a precedent.

It is not unknown how complicated it is in our tax structure, considering the three levels of government, to establish the exact incidence of all the taxes that fall on the operation, both in terms of quantity and complexity.

On the other hand, each jurisdiction could sanction or dictate its own regulatory standards with conditions, requirements and formalities that do not necessarily coincide, a situation that is not consistent with the objective of the current administration of “simplifying” procedures and obligations of taxpayers.

Making the burden of local taxes (provincial and municipal) perceptible can be a discussion that requires more time than necessary and thus deferring its application and thereby diluting the objective of transparency in terms of the total tax incidence in the price of goods. goods and services to final consumers.

What was originally planned?

That project, which ultimately did not prosper, promoted two modifications: the incorporation of a subsection f) to article 61 of law 24,240, regarding consumer information, and it incorporated an article 61bis to said law, which specifically dealt with fiscal transparency. .

Article 61 establishes guidelines that facilitate the understanding and use of information on issues inherent to the consumer, guide them to prevent the risks that may arise from the consumption of products or the use of services and to help them evaluate alternatives and use resources appropriately. efficient, it must be taken into account, among others, health content, nutrition, dangers and labeling of products, relevant legislation, weights and measures, etc.

In this regulatory environment, the project added subsection f) that stipulated new content: “Information on the approximate value corresponding to the national, provincial or Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and municipal taxes that have an impact on the formation of the respective prices. selling.”

This provision spoke of “approximate value” and although article 61bis dealt with this aspect, what was established was more aimed at consumer orientation than at full knowledge of the tax burden contained in the acquisition. Thus, the PEN opted for a pragmatic, “Brazilian-style” position.

The article that was planned to be incorporated (61bis) was precisely concerned with regulating the what and how of the tax information to be provided to the consumer and those who were obliged.

The rule advocated that invoices, tickets and equivalent documents issued to final consumers for goods and services throughout the national territory, should contain information on the approximate value corresponding to federal, provincial or CABA and municipal taxes that had an impact on the formation of the respective sales prices. Note that the concept of approximate value was reiterated, the determination of which the article dealt with later.

It was stated that the information that was required to be included in the invoices or tickets would be additional to that corresponding to the application of article 39 LIVA. At the same time, it stipulated that the data to be recorded pursuant to article 61bis itself should appear in a “consumer information” section of invoices, receipts and equivalent documents.

The information required should be expressed in terms of amount and percentage of what the taxes included in the final purchase price paid by the consumer represent. And it added that such information should be presented by the subtotals corresponding to the national, provincial or Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and municipal levels and by the total corresponding to the sum of said levels.

In other words, details of the incidence by level and the total. Beyond talking about “approximate value,” discrimination could have setbacks in the systemic implementation depending on the device and in the Treasury’s electronic billing systems.

What arises from the current regulations?

The current regulations changed the scope of the obligation, concentrating it only on national taxes. But in parallel, it makes an invitation, a call to the provincial, CABA and municipal states to join the measure.

However, unlike the aforementioned draft, it does not stipulate any guidelines that mark a guideline or a course that tends towards homogenization and uniformity of criteria. Both accession and implementation are open to the decision of each jurisdiction, which may or may not adhere.

These circumstances, even with the understanding that an “approximate value” may be debatable, lead to certain questions: how will the incidence of local taxes have to be reflected in the invoice? When would the jurisdictions be in a position to implement the measure and under what premises? Will an agreement be possible regarding forms and requirements between the provinces, CABA and municipalities?

Everything seems to indicate that the implementation of the obligation to discriminate subnational taxes is not an immediate or short-term measure.