In June 2026, SUNAT updated its Catalog of High Tax Risk Schemes, adding 11 new schemes to the 24 that had been included in the document since 2020. This update reflects the strengthening of the tax administration’s enforcement mechanisms and places special emphasis on financing transactions between related parties.
Among the newly added schemes, three share a common element: legal structures that, despite taking different contractual forms, are considered by SUNAT to be financing transactions subject to Transfer Pricing rules. The message is clear: tax assessments are increasingly focused on the economic substance of transactions and not solely on the legal form chosen by the parties.
Three Structures That SUNAT Considers Deserving Special Attention
1. Capital Contributions That, in Practice, Function as Loans
The first scheme describes a situation in which a foreign company transfers funds to its Peruvian affiliate, recording them as pending capitalization. However, over time, the contribution is never formalized, and the money is returned in full to the contributor.
During the audit process, the international exchange of information revealed that a repayment obligation existed from the outset of the transaction and that the Peruvian company’s mining concessions had been provided as collateral. These factors led SUNAT to conclude that the facts described suggest the transaction could essentially be classified as a loan rather than a genuine capital contribution.
2. Financing Channeled Through an Intermediate Company
The second scheme analyzes a structure in which a parent company contributes capital to a Peruvian subsidiary, which subsequently transfers those same funds to another related company through a loan agreement.
Subsequently, various corporate transactions—including the sale of shares and a merger by absorption—allow the initial structure to be dissolved and the group’s financial obligations to be settled without triggering the corresponding taxation on interest.
For SUNAT, the joint analysis of all transactions reveals an intra-group financing structure whose tax treatment must be evaluated in accordance with Transfer Pricing rules.
3. Joint Ventures Used as Financing Mechanisms
The third scheme involves joint venture agreements through which a foreign company provides funds to a Peruvian affiliate.
Although the transaction is formally presented as a joint venture agreement, SUNAT identifies various elements that indicate a different nature: minimal profit sharing, the absence of real economic risk for the contributor, no sharing of losses, and a guaranteed return of capital upon the contract’s expiration.
Under these circumstances, the tax authority considers that the transaction could be reclassified economically as a loan, with the resulting tax consequences regarding withholding tax on interest and the limitations applicable to the deduction of financial expenses.
Economic substance prevails over legal form
The three frameworks adopted by SUNAT share the same analytical criterion: the tax classification of a transaction does not depend exclusively on the name assigned in the contracts or on the accounting treatment applied by the parties.
When transactions are conducted between related parties, the tax authority assesses whether the economic terms reflect the true nature of the transaction. Consequently, the determination of market value, as well as the possible existence of implicit interest, must be based on the economic reality of the transaction.
This approach is consistent with the principles set forth in the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, which prioritize the analysis of the parties’ actual conduct and the functions, risks, and assets involved.
Key risk indicators identified by SUNAT
Based on the published guidelines, it is possible to identify certain factors that increase the risk of an audit:
- The existence of guarantees that are inconsistent with the declared legal nature of the transaction.
- Capital repayment obligations agreed upon explicitly or implicitly from the outset.
- Absence of real economic risk for the party making the alleged contribution.
- Cash flows that, through various corporate transactions, allow funds to return to the same economic group.
- Inconsistencies between contractual documentation, accounting records, and the actual execution of the transaction.
The presence of one or more of these elements may lead the tax authority to reclassify the transaction and require the corresponding tax adjustments.
A Trend That Reinforces International Tax Enforcement
The inclusion of three schemes with similar characteristics within a single update to the catalog highlights a clear trend in SUNAT’s enforcement strategy. The agency has been strengthening its ability to identify intragroup financing structures through the use of economic analysis tools and the international exchange of information.
It is particularly noteworthy that, in some of the published cases, the decisive evidence came from information obtained in other jurisdictions, confirming the growing cooperation among tax authorities and the importance of maintaining consistent documentation in all countries where a multinational group operates.
The Importance of Reviewing Intragroup Financing Transactions
In this context, companies with transactions between related parties should review not only the determination of the interest rates used but also the economic and legal consistency of the entire financing structure.
Transfer Pricing documentation must demonstrate that the nature of the transaction effectively reflects economic reality, consistently supporting the contractual, financial, and accounting terms adopted by the parties.
At TPC Group, we advise multinational groups on the planning, documentation, and defense of their Transfer Pricing transactions in Latin America. The recent update to SUNAT’s Catalog of High-Tax-Risk Schemes confirms the importance of comprehensively evaluating intragroup financing transactions, strengthening the documentation and economic rationale for each transaction to reduce contingencies in the event of a tax audit.
Source: