Individuals domiciled in Peru are taxed on their worldwide income. Non-domiciled individuals are taxed in their Peruvian income source only.
In the case of domiciled individuals, the net income from foreign sources must be added to the net employment income, and the tax is calculated on the total of these combined incomes.
Peru’s tax regime includes Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) rules. As such, domiciled individuals must include their proportional share of the CFC’s passive net income (such as interest, dividends, royalties and capital gains) in their annual taxable income, regardless of whether the income has been distributed.
With regard to local fideicomisos (Peruvian trusts), Peru has a specific tax regime created under Peruvian law. These trusts are considered fiscally transparent (pass-through) vehicles, meaning that the income generated through them is directly attributed to the settlor, who is considered the taxpayer.
In cases where the settlors are individuals, the applicable tax treatment will depend on whether they are considered domiciled or not.
In addition, certain categories of capital income, such as dividends, interest and foreign-source income, are subject to tax deferral rules. Under these rules, the payment of income tax on these types of income may be deferred until they are distributed to the individual taxpayer.
If the trust deed provides that the assets transferred to the trust can revert to the settlor, any transfer of the referred assets into or out of the trust will not be subject to taxation in Peru.
Peru does not have an estate, inheritance, gift, or similar transfer tax. As such, there are no exemptions available, whether annual, lifetime, or purpose-based (eg, for health or education). Real estate and securities received as gifts or heritage by individuals are not granted a tax basis or limited to the documented tax basis incurred by the transferor.
However, individuals who purchase real estate in Peru may be subject to a real estate transfer tax known as the Impuesto de Alcabala (the “Alcabala tax”). This tax is levied at a rate of 3% on the purchase price, with certain exemptions applicable depending on the specific circumstances.
Additionally, all real estate in Peru is subject to an annual municipal property tax known as Impuesto Predial, which is calculated based on the property’s assessed value.
There are income tax planning opportunities in Peru, which vary depending on the specific structure and characteristics of each individual and/or family members, as well as the types of assets and jurisdictions involved. Both local and international structures may be used for planning purposes, including trusts, insurance products and investment funds.
It is essential, however, that any tax planning strategy be based on a rigorous assessment of the individual’s or family’s particular situation and objectives. Tax planning must always be carried out within the framework of the law, and not with the purpose of tax avoidance or evasion.
Compliance with legal and regulatory requirements is key to ensuring the sustainability and legitimacy of any planning structure.
In Peru, non-domiciled individuals who sell real estate located in the country are subject to income tax on the capital gain derived from the transaction; the applicable tax rate is 5%. Likewise, rental income (lease income) received by non-domiciled individuals from Peruvian real estate is also taxed at 5%.
Additionally, individuals who purchase real estate in Peru may be subject to the Alcabala tax, which is levied at a rate of 3% on the purchase price, with certain exemptions depending on the circumstances.
Furthermore, all real estate properties in Peru are subject to an annual municipal property tax known as Impuesto Predial, which is calculated based on the property’s official assessed value.
There are planning strategies and structures that may be considered depending on the specific case, including the use of holding vehicles or other investment structures such as local investment funds and trusts. In Peru, two tax-efficient real estate investment vehicles are available: FIRBI (Real Estate Income Investment Fund) and FIBRA (Real Estate Income Securitization Trust). Both are designed to generate regular lease business income and offer potential for capital appreciation. However, each situation must be carefully evaluated in accordance with Peruvian tax regulations.
Peru has maintained relative stability in its tax laws, particularly with respect to the taxation of individuals, estates, and wealth planning structures. Although presidential elections can generate a degree of uncertainty regarding potential tax reforms, no significant changes have been implemented in recent years. The core tax framework applicable to high net worth individuals, trusts and estates has remained consistent.
Peru has taken several steps in recent years to address real or perceived abuses and loopholes in its tax system, in line with international transparency and compliance standards.
Peru is a participating jurisdiction in the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) developed by the OECD and exchanges financial account information with other CRS jurisdictions. Additionally, Peru has entered into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the United States to implement the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), which facilitates the exchange of information regarding financial accounts held by US persons in Peruvian financial institutions.
Furthermore, Peru has established a registry of ultimate beneficial owners (Registro de Beneficiarios Finales), which requires legal entities and certain arrangements to report their ultimate beneficial owners to the Peruvian tax authority (SUNAT). This registry is not public, but it is available to the Peruvian tax administration for enforcement purposes.
These measures have increased transparency and regulatory scrutiny, which must be carefully considered in any tax or estate planning strategy involving domiciled clients or assets located in Peru.
In recent years, succession planning has become more common in Peru. Peruvian families and individuals are showing greater interest in establishing wealth organisation strategies that entail adequate succession planning, especially considering the various jurisdictions that may serve as tax residence for family members, which means diverse tax implications.
Likewise, there is still resistance among older generations to transfer wealth and control to younger generations. However, there is increasing concern about establishing guidelines for adequate training of these younger generations to ensure effective management of the family assets and/or business.
International planning has had a significant impact on succession planning in recent years. A broader analysis has become part of the firm’s routine advice on these matters, for example:
The increasing focus on international planning has led the firm to focus on identifying different alternatives and risks, aiming to offer flexible solutions that can adapt to future challenges.
In addition, family protocols ‒ including not only succession planning but also guidelines on corporate governance and equity preservation for family businesses ‒ have become increasingly important. The firm focuses on providing families with clear terms and comprehensive but detailed coverage regarding the operation and scope of the family protocol, avoiding ambiguous provisions or unresolved issues.
Peru has forced heirship laws regulated by the Peruvian Civil Code. Peruvian forced heirship laws are considered imperative rules, ie, such rules are mandatory and cannot be waived by mutual or consensual arrangements.
According to Peruvian Civil Code, a portion of the inheritance is obligatorily reserved for legitimate or forced heirs (herederos forzosos). A forced heir can be the deceased’s children, spouse, parents or siblings (or their direct descendants) with certain rules depending on the case.
If an individual at the time of their death has living forced heirs, their inheritance shall be distributed in favour of such forced heirs, as per the following terms.
If an individual has no living forced heirs, they can dispose of the totality of their equity in favour of any person of their choosing.
Forced heirs cannot be excluded through wills or succession agreements (ie, trust agreements), nor can they waive their right to the reserved portion prior to the death of the decedent or testator. They have mandatory rights over the assets of a deceased individual.
The Peruvian Civil Code recognises two patrimonial regimes.
In general, the cost basis of property in Peru is determined by the amount paid for its acquisition.
In cases where the property is acquired gratuitously ‒ such as through a donation or inheritance ‒ the cost basis is generally considered to be zero. Alternatively, it may be possible to use the transferor’s original cost basis prior to the transfer, provided that such cost can be duly and reliably substantiated with appropriate documentation.
In Peru, there are legal tools and planning strategies available to help transfer assets to younger generations in a tax-efficient way.
For example, gifts or advancements of inheritance (anticipos de legítima) are not subject to income tax when they are made to individuals. This means that such transfers can be used to pass wealth to the next generation without generating an income tax liability.
However, it is important to understand that even though these transfers are exempt from income tax, they may still be subject to the Alcabala tax, if they involve a real estate property.
The Alcabala tax applies to the transfer of ownership of real estate, even if the transfer is made by way of a gift. However, advancements of inheritance are exempt from the Alcabala tax.
Additionally, trusts established under Peruvian law (fideicomisos) can be used for succession planning purposes. In such cases, the transfer of assets to the trust may be carried out without triggering income tax, provided certain conditions are met.
Digital assets such as email accounts or cryptocurrency are treated like any other asset for succession planning purposes in Peru (there is no specific regulation governing them). These assets are usually included in wills or succession agreements with an appropriate description of the assets. However, the effectiveness of any succession plan for this type of asset will also depend on the internal policies of the entities that control or manage these assets and/or respective providers.
In Peru, locally established trusts are commonly used for tax and estate planning purposes. These include securitisation trusts (fideicomisos de titulización), banking or administrative trusts, insurance structures and investment funds. These vehicles are often used to manage and transfer assets efficiently while offering flexibility and continuity in estate planning.
In addition, foreign structures such as offshore trusts, foundations and life insurance policies governed by foreign law are also used for succession planning, particularly when it involves foreign assets or family members who are tax residents in multiple jurisdictions. These international structures can offer strategic advantages, especially in cross-border estate planning scenarios.
The legal framework allows for the establishment of trusts (fideicomisos) under Peruvian law. These trusts are widely used for various purposes, including estate planning, asset protection, securitisation and investment management.
Peruvian trusts are governed primarily by the Peruvian Finance and Secure Law along with the applicable tax laws. They are considered legally valid vehicles capable of holding and managing assets on behalf of beneficiaries according to the terms set forth in the trust agreement.
From a Peruvian perspective, the tax and regulatory rules do not contain specific provisions regarding trusts established abroad, however, foreign trust are legally recognised in Peru. The tax treatment of such trusts must be analysed based on general tax principles and the facts and circumstances of each case.
Under Peruvian tax law, individuals who are beneficiaries of a foreign revocable or irrevocable trust are not subject to income tax on the distributions they receive, provided such distributions qualify as gratuitous transfers. According to Peruvian Income Tax regulations, gratuitous transfers (ie, liberalities) received by individuals are not considered taxable income.
Additionally, income generated through foreign revocable trusts may be subject to Peruvian CFC rules, provided certain conditions are met. In such cases, the income could be attributed directly to the Peruvian-domiciled settlor for tax purposes.
In contrast, irrevocable and discretionary trusts are generally not subject to the Peruvian CFC rules, as the assets and income are no longer deemed to be under the control or ownership of the settlor.
The mere act of serving as a fiduciary of a foreign trust, foundation or similar structure does not itself trigger specific tax consequences. However, such a role may give rise to reporting obligations, particularly under ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO) rules, which require the disclosure of the structure and its stakeholders to the tax authorities.
Planning opportunities may arise in structuring foreign trusts, taking into account the specific circumstances of each individual and the nature and location of the assets involved, provided that the conditions triggering the application of the Peruvian General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) are not present.
Since irrevocable fideicomisos do not represent additional tax benefits under Peruvian tax law, their use is not common in Peru.
Regarding irrevocable or discretional foreign trusts, the latter may imply additional tax benefits under Peruvian law. However, any flexibility in control by the settlor or beneficiaries that could alter or challenge the irrevocable and discretionary nature of the foreign trust could impact Peruvian tax benefits.
It is common in this type of structure to grant broader powers to third parties, such as a protector, board of director or investment manager, including the authority to terminate the trust, change the trustee or remove/incorporate beneficiaries.
Set out below are the most popular methods for asset protection planning in Peru.
Some of the more popular family succession planning structures in Peru include the following.
Gratuitous transfers (gifts and inheritances) in favour of individuals are not subject to income tax, as explained in 2.6 Transfer of Assets: Vehicle and Planning Mechanisms.
However, capital gains derived from transfers made for consideration may be subject to taxation, depending on the source of the income and the tax residency of the transferor.
Specifically, the sale of shares or ownership interests in companies or entities incorporated in Peru qualifies as Peruvian-source income and is subject to Peruvian income tax. In contrast, the transfer of shares or interests in foreign entities is considered foreign-source income and is only taxable in Peru if the transferor is a Peruvian tax resident, as Peruvian residents are taxed on their worldwide income.
However, Peruvian income tax law also establishes that gains derived from an indirect transfer of Peruvian shares qualify as a Peruvian source income when the shares of a non-domiciled company are transferred, and the foreign company owns shares, either directly or indirectly, in a Peruvian entity, subject to certain thresholds and additional requirements stipulated in the law and regulations.
It is also important to note that Peruvian tax law does not allow for valuation discounts based on lack of marketability or lack of control when determining the taxable capital gain. The gain is generally calculated based on the difference between the sale price and the acquisition cost, without adjustments for liquidity or control limitations.
The most common wealth disputes in Peru relate to the following.
The Peruvian judicial system provides for the following mechanisms for compensating aggrieved parties in wealth disputes.
These mechanisms for compensating aggrieved parties aim to remedy the harm caused, establish liability, and if possible, restore the victim to the position they would have been in, if the harm had not occurred.
In Peru, the fiduciary or trustee can only be exercised by trust companies duly authorised and monitored by the Peruvian Banking and Finance Authority (SBS) or the Peruvian Regulatory Authority (SMV), as applicable. These entities can be part of the Peruvian financial system or independent entities provided they are duly authorised by the SBS.
Trust companies in Peru are mainly regulated under the Peruvian Banking and Finance Law. As they are entities supervised and monitored by the SBS or the SMV, as applicable, they are subject to strict regulation, including solvency standards and auditing requirements.
The liabilities of a trustee in Peru are regulated under the Peruvian Banking and Finance Law and the respective trust agreement.
In Peru, it is not possible to pierce the veil of a trust or fideicomiso and hold the trustee liable for the liabilities of the trust except in cases of proven fraud or wilful misconduct of the trustee.
Although Peruvian trustees are obliged to act with diligence, loyalty and transparency, it is possible to exonerate or limit their liability through a trust agreement. However, liability arising from fraud or wilful misconduct cannot be waived in any circumstances. It is common to delegate certain powers of the trustee in favour of third-party advisors. Such delegation of powers does not necessarily limit the liability of the trustee: any limitation will apply as long as it is expressly established in the respective trust agreement.
Although the regulation on trusts and trustees in Peru is limited, the trustee is an entity supervised by the SBS and the SMV, as applicable, and is obliged to act at all times in a prudent and transparent manner.
In this regard, the trustee must act in accordance with Peruvian legislation and the terms of the trust agreement, on the understanding that the trust is an autonomous estate, separate from the trustee’s assets, and for this reason the trustee must keep separate accounts and financial statements. Fiduciary investments must comply with the guidelines set out in the agreement, and the trustee will bear no liability provided they act prudently in accordance with the terms of the agreement.
There is no specific standard such as the modern portfolio theory (MPT) in Peru.
The trustee must invest in accordance with the terms of the trust agreement. Although there is no express legal obligation to diversify investments, the trustee is expected to act in a professional and prudent manner at all times, in accordance with the terms of the contract and Peruvian law.
It is quite common for a Peruvian fideicomiso to hold/own the shares of an operating company. While it is not common for the trustee to operate the company whose shares are held in the fideicomiso, there is no legal restriction to prevent this. In such cases, the trustee must manage the operating company as provided for under the respective trust agreement.
Domicile
For tax purposes, an individual will be considered domiciled in Peru under the following conditions.
On the other hand, individuals, whether Peruvian or foreign citizens, who qualify as Peruvian domiciled, will lose such domiciled status in the following cases.
The regulation also states that Peruvian citizens who have lost their residency status will regain it upon returning to the country, unless they do so on a temporary basis, defined as remaining in Peru for 183 days or less within any 12-month period. In such cases, tax residency will only be reinstated as of the next taxable year, ie, 1 January of the following year.
Residency
Migratory residence in Peru can be categorised as follows.
Citizenship
Peruvian citizenship can be obtained by birth, naturalisation or by option.
The means and requirements for an individual to obtain Peruvian citizenship include the following.
In Peru, the following special mechanisms are often used to protect the assets of vulnerable people.
Under Peruvian law it is possible to appoint a tutor, curator or support person for minors, individuals with disabilities or individuals with other conditions. Strictly speaking, in the case of minors, their parents exercise parentally authority; however, in their absence, a guardian must be appointed.
The appointment of a tutor, curator or support person in Peru requires a judicial proceeding either through an interdiction process or a support and safeguards designation, depending on the type of disability or condition and/or legal capacity of the protected individual. Ongoing judicial supervision is required, and the disposition of certain assets or equity belonging to the protected individual must have the prior approval of the court.
Certain individuals use foreign trust or local fideicomisos to organise their wealth and ensure their protection and quality of life once they age, addressing certain future needs in the best interests of both the settlor and their spouse.
Likewise, it has also become common to appoint a support person to act as a representative in the event of loss of capacity (designación de apoyo y salvaguarda).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Peru has enacted the Law on the Elderly (Law No 30490), which establishes rights and protection measures to guarantee the exercise of the rights of older persons, including preferential access to healthcare, pensions and justice for elder individuals. The Law also includes measures for the prevention of neglect and violence against the elderly.
In Peru, children born out of wedlock as well as adopted children have the same legal rights as children born within marriage. Legal rights are applicable ‒ including inheritance rights, maintenance and other filiation rights ‒ against natural parents, adoptive parents and relatives. If a parent does not recognise an individual as a son/daughter, but such parental relationship is established by a court ruling, the aforementioned legal rights will apply to the children.
Under Peruvian law, children conceived before the death of a parent are entitled to the same legal rights as a child born after the death of a parent.
Although Peruvian law does not expressly regulate the rights of children by surrogacy, the Peruvian General Health Law establishes that the genetic mother and the surrogate mother must be the same person. Traditionally, surrogate mothers have no genetic link to the child born by surrogacy. This regulation presents a problem in determining the filiation of children born via surrogacy.
Peruvian law does not regulate the rights of posthumously conceived children (children conceived after the death of a biological parent). In principle, they would not have filiation rights against the deceased biological parent. However, such children may still have non-forced heir rights under Peruvian law, provided the deceased biological parent provided as such in a valid written document.
In Peru, the recognition of a child depends on the registration before the competent authority, or by court ruling.
In Peru, same-sex marriage is not recognised. Presently, Peruvian regulation and jurisprudence is quite restrictive on this matter.
Some planning mechanisms used for same-sex couples include the following.
In Peru, de facto unions (union de hecho) between a man and a woman are legally recognised. Provided certain conditions are met (ie, proven cohabitation for more than two years without legal impediments), the de facto union can confer the same rights and benefits as marriage. Under this arrangement, the community property regime applies, and the couple will also acquire the reserved portion rights applicable to forced heirs under Peruvian law.
Peruvian tax law encourages charitable giving by allowing individuals and corporate taxpayers to deduct donations made to government entities and qualified non-profit organisations, provided that the recipient’s purpose involves at least one of the following areas: charity, social assistance, education, culture, science, art, literature, sports, health, or national heritage.
Such donations are deductible for income tax purposes up to a limit of 10% of the donor’s net taxable income. However, in order to qualify for this tax benefit, the recipient organisation must be duly registered with the Peruvian Tax Authority (SUNAT) as an authorised recipient of donations.
Non-profit associations and foundations are most commonly used for charitable planning. Both have legal personalities.
The advantages include:
The disadvantages include:
Av. Víctor Andrés Belaúnde 147
Vía Principal 133, Piso 2
Lima 27
Peru
+51 1442 5100
+51 1442 5100
clara.vonloebenstein@rebaza-alcazar.com www.rebaza-alcazar.comThe International Tax Transparency Regime: Challenges and Issues More Than Ten Years After its Entry into Force
Introduction
The International Tax Transparency Regime (the “CFC Rules”) originated in the United States in 1962 with the regulation of Controlled Foreign Corporations (CFCs). Countries such as Canada, Japan, and South Africa adopted similar rules, and in 1998, the OECD recommended their worldwide implementation.
This regime emerged in response to the practice of establishing entities in favourable tax jurisdictions to hold foreign investments, thereby allowing taxpayers to defer tax payments until profits were distributed. To counter this, it was established that shareholders of foreign entities would be taxed on passive income earned, even if such income was not distributed.
The OECD and the G-20 promoted the BEPS Action Plan, with Action 3 specifically recommending effective controlled foreign company rules. Peru adopted the CFC Rules in 2013 through Legislative Decree No 1120, requiring resident taxpayers to pay taxes on passive income earned by controlled foreign entities, regardless of whether such income was distributed (the “Regulation”).
The aim of the Regulation is to prevent base erosion and the deferral of income tax. Additionally, a first-in, first-out (FIFO) rule applies, under which dividends are deemed to be distributed first from profits generated up to 2012, which are taxed upon receipt.
The CFC Rules have achieved their objective of preventing income tax deferral. However, challenges and complexities in its application remain, which will be analysed below.
The CFC Rules in Peru
Before addressing the core topics of this article, it is important to review the main features of the CFC Rules.
The term “share in results” is not expressly defined, but it is interpreted as the right to use or benefit from the profits generated by the NDCE.
Challenges, case studies and issues
Violation of the principle of legality
Article 112 of the LIR requires that an NDCE has a legal personality separate from its shareholders. However, the Regulation broadens this definition to include entities without legal personality (such as trusts or funds), which exceeds what is established by law. Although this extension may help prevent tax avoidance, it infringes upon the principle of legality enshrined in Article 74 of the Peruvian Constitution, as the Regulation cannot contradict or distort the law. In the authors’ opinion, while the concept of an NDCE should indeed encompass any type of entity, regardless of whether it has legal personality, such a definition should have been incorporated into the LIR itself, not into the Regulation. This would have respected the proper legislative process, ensuring greater transparency and legitimacy in the creation of tax rules, and reinforcing legal certainty and adherence to the principle of legality.
Presumption in the classification of passive income
Article 114 of the LIR presumes that if 80% or more of an NDCE’s income is passive, then all of its income is considered passive. This presumption, which does not admit rebuttal, simplifies the application of the tax regime by clarifying which income should be deemed passive, particularly when the majority of the entity’s income is of this nature. However, the provision refers to “income” instead of gross income, which could lead to a situation where, even if passive income is less than 80% of total income, the presumption still applies to all income. This may create distortions when the basis of comparison is income rather than net income. For example, two entities with the same amount of passive income could be treated differently due to variations in their gross income. It is recommended that the law refer to net income instead of income to avoid inequitable outcomes. Notably, this issue also arises in the context of non-attributable income. As previously mentioned, the LIR states that passive income earned by an NDCE will not be attributed during a tax year if such income accounts for 20% or less of the entity’s total income. However, calculating this percentage based on gross income instead of net income can also lead to significant distortions.
Calculation of the 75% threshold
To qualify as an NDCE, an entity must be located in a jurisdiction where passive income is either untaxed or taxed at a rate equal to or lower than 75% of the Peruvian income tax rate. The Regulation indicates that one must compare the amount of tax paid by ‒ or payable by ‒ the non-domiciled entity in the country where it is incorporated, established, or considered a resident, with the amount of tax that would have been payable in Peru, excluding withholding on dividends. This can result in an excessive combined tax burden (up to 50.65%), which can negatively affect reinvestment. That said, the authors believe this aspect related to the application of foreign tax credits should be corrected, as the CFC Rules must not only prevent base erosion and discourage the relocation of capital to low- or no-tax jurisdictions but also avoid double taxation scenarios. It is recommended that taxpayers be allowed to apply foreign withholding tax credits even if the tax is paid after the filing of the tax return, in order to prevent double taxation.
Who should be considered the taxpayer in a revocable trust when both the settlor and the beneficiary are tax residents in the country?
Assuming that trusts may qualify as NDCEs, a question arises as to who should be taxed: the settlor or the beneficiary.
Position in favour of the beneficiary
It is argued that the beneficiary, as the person entitled to the benefits of the trust, should be the one subject to taxation. This view relies on the rule stating that an NDCE is considered owned by a Peruvian-resident taxpayer when, at the end of the taxable year, the taxpayer ‒ either alone or together with related parties domiciled in Peru ‒ holds a direct or indirect interest of more than 50% in the capital, profits, or voting rights of the entity.
Accordingly, for CFC Rules purposes, ownership falls on the beneficiaries of the revocable trust, as they are entitled to participate in its benefits. Once the assets are transferred, the settlor no longer holds rights over them.
This position asserts that income attribution should be based on the percentage of participation the beneficiaries hold in the trust’s results.
Position in favour of the settlor
This view holds that the settlor, by retaining the power to revoke the trust or direct its distributions, maintains economic control and should therefore be considered the taxpayer. Ownership over the results is seen as the unrestricted ability to reclaim or revoke the trust’s assets and income, to decide on distribution in the settlor’s own favour, or to redirect distribution to third parties. The beneficiary, by contrast, merely has an expectancy right, without a guarantee of receiving income.
Despite these opposing views, the authors believe it is essential to examine, on a case-by-case basis, whether the income generated by the trust should be attributed to the settlor or the beneficiary, in accordance with the provisions of the trust deed. In the authors’ view, the settlor should be considered the taxpayer if, after such analysis, the following conditions are met:
The authors do not believe it would be reasonable to require a beneficiary ‒ who merely holds an expectancy right to receive certain income ‒ to pay income tax, especially when there is a possibility that their expectation may never materialise if the settlor decides to revoke the assets or change the beneficiaries. Since the settlor ultimately decides whether the income generated by the trust is distributed to the beneficiaries as a gratuitous transfer, it follows that the settlor has the effective right to such income. Therefore, the settlor should be considered the owner of the NDCE and the taxpayer for income tax purposes under the CFC Rules.
This interpretation is consistent with the position of the Peruvian Tax Authority (SUNAT) (Report No 049-2017-SUNAT), which states that if the trust does not have a separate legal personality, the settlor controls the results. Furthermore, gratuitous transfers received by individuals are not subject to income tax, meaning beneficiaries should not be taxed on income they neither control nor are guaranteed to receive.
Issues regarding non-attributable income
Article 115 of the LIR excludes certain types of passive income from attribution, such as:
When such income is not attributed, the resident taxpayer will only be taxed once the NDCE distributes it in the form of dividends.
At first glance, this may seem beneficial, as the CFC Rules would not apply to such income, and tax would only be triggered upon distribution to the Peruvian taxpayer. However, in these cases, a situation of double taxation may also arise, as illustrated in the following examples.
This issue also arises when investing in countries with different withholding tax rates. If the rate is lower than 75% of the Peruvian tax rate, the CFC Rules apply; if it is higher, the regime does not apply, but tax is levied upon distribution. In both cases, the lack of recognition of foreign taxes as credits results in an excessive tax burden.
Therefore, the authors believe that taxpayers should be allowed to use the foreign tax paid as a credit ‒ even if the income is not attributable ‒ in order to avoid economic double taxation.
Non-application of the CFC Rules to income generated by an NDCE held through a local trust
According to Article 14-A of the LIR, trusts are transparent vehicles, so the income they generate is attributed to the settlor. Thus, the tax treatment of income earned through trusts depends on the status of the settlor ‒ whether an individual or legal entity, resident or non-resident ‒ as well as the nature of the income earned through the trust (eg, capital or business income, Peruvian or foreign-source).
If the settlor is a resident individual, the recognition of foreign-source income by a trust ‒ for purposes of recording and attributing it to the settlor for taxation ‒ must be based on the income actually received by the trust, as expressly stated in Article 29-A of the LIR.
This means the trust will only record income when it receives dividends or profits from the NDCE, which are measured according to the accounting and financial policies applied in the jurisdiction where the entity is incorporated or located. Prior to such receipt, no income is considered to have been realised, and therefore, no accumulated earnings should be recorded or attributed to the settlor. In this context, there is no attributable income and the CFC Rules do not apply. Instead, the specific rules of the LIR for foreign-source income earned through trusts apply.
It is also important to highlight that both the scope of application of the CFC Rules and the requirements for an offshore company to be classified as an NDCE subject to the regime are limited to cases in which the entities are owned by resident taxpayers. However, trusts do not qualify as taxpayers under Article 14 of the LIR and therefore are not subject to the CFC Rules. As a result, income is only taxed when actually received, under the general income tax regime. Only at that point must the trust recognise and record the foreign income for later attribution.
Irrevocable and discretionary trust with estate planning purposes
An irrevocable and discretionary trust is a type of trust in which the settlor cannot amend its terms once established, and the trustee has discretion over the management and distribution of the trust’s assets in accordance with the provisions of the trust deed.
The authors consider that an irrevocable and discretionary trust established for estate planning purposes should not qualify as an NDCE, as it functions as a vehicle for the administration of assets contributed in favour of the beneficiaries upon the settlor’s death. This is based on the understanding that the administration of the assets contributed to the trust is carried out at the trustee’s discretion, and the settlor has no ability to amend, terminate, or interfere with the fiduciary arrangement, nor any control over the management of the assets and their income. It is worth recalling that one of the requirements for a trust to qualify as an NDCE under the LIR is that, at the end of the tax year, the taxpayer ‒ alone or together with related parties domiciled in Peru ‒ holds a direct or indirect interest in more than 50% of the capital, profits, or voting rights of such entity. This condition does not arise in the case of an irrevocable and discretionary trust. Therefore, if the settlor has no participation or control over the trust’s results, it should not be classified as an NDCE.
The CFC Rules likewise do not apply to the beneficiaries, as they have no enforceable rights over the trust assets, only mere expectations.
However, if the settlor retains the power to revoke the trust or exercises discretion over distributions (either because the trust deed permits such interpretation or it is observed in practice), the SUNAT would have grounds to argue that the trust qualifies as a vehicle subject to the CFC Rules, thereby triggering tax obligations and potential penalties.
Tax treatment of a donation to a trust
Donations to non-domiciled trusts do not generate Peruvian-source income nor do they qualify as passive income under the CFC Rules. Therefore, no taxable event is triggered, even if the donated assets are financial instruments issued by Peruvian companies or vehicles.
Moreover, the trust is not considered a related party of the donor nor a legal entity for tax purposes.
The income generated from the donated assets will only be taxed in Peru once it is distributed to Peruvian tax residents.
Conclusion
More than a decade after their implementation in Peru, the CFC Rules have successfully addressed income tax deferral and discouraged the use of low-tax jurisdictions for passive income accumulation. However, their application continues to raise significant legal, technical, and practical challenges. The broad interpretation of NDCEs, rigid presumptions regarding passive income, and restrictions on recognising foreign tax credits have led to concerns about legality, fairness, and economic double taxation, thereby highlighting the need for regulatory refinements.
Av. Víctor Andrés Belaúnde 147
Vía Principal 133, Piso 2
Lima 27
Peru
+51 1442 5100
+51 1442 5100
clara.vonloebenstein@rebaza-alcazar.com www.rebaza-alcazar.com