Criterion 43/ISR/PI · First Amendment to Annex 3 of the RMF 2026 · DOF July 17, 2026

On July 17, 2026, the First Amendment to Annex 3 of the Miscellaneous Tax Resolution for 2026, which compiles the criteria on improper tax practices, was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation.

Among them, criterion 43/ISR/PI is maintained and reinforced. Under it, the SAT considers it an improper tax practice to deliver funds to employees, partners, or shareholders through civil associations, companies, or other third parties, under concepts such as labor incentives, bonuses, commissions, premiums, or special compensation, giving them the treatment of exempt income.

An important point of context

This criterion is not new: it already existed since 2024 under the code 43/ISR/NV. What changed is its designation —what were previously called “non-binding criteria” are now called “improper tax practices”— and its recent update. In other words, if your company operates a scheme of this type, the risk of a contingency would apply for the last 5 fiscal years.

The authority’s reasoning

The Income Tax Law recognizes as exempt only the income expressly provided for in its Article 93. Therefore, when an employee, partner, or shareholder receives funds derived from their relationship with the company, such amounts must be analyzed according to their true tax nature and not by the name assigned to them or the route they follow.

Put simply: interposing a third party does not change the nature of the income. If it is in substance wages, assimilated income, or dividends, it must be treated as such.

The authority further clarifies that NOM-035 does not require making monetary payments to employees, so invoking it to justify exempt compensation is improper.

Consequences the criterion warns of

The effect is not limited to the loss of the exemption. The criterion identifies simultaneous consequences for all participants:

Party	Consequence
Company	Obligation to withhold and remit the omitted ISR, with inflation adjustment, surcharges, and penalties. In addition, the payments made to the third party are not deductible and the VAT charged for such services is not creditable, as the strict indispensability requirement is not met.
Employee, partner, or shareholder	The funds received must be accrued for tax purposes; they do not enjoy any exemption.
Advisors and third parties	Those who participate in implementing these schemes are expressly identified as parties to the improper practice.

The result is a twofold negative effect: the company pays the ISR it failed to withhold and, in addition, loses the deduction of the payment made to the third party and the crediting of the corresponding VAT. The final cost usually exceeds that of having paid the item directly through payroll.

Why a “non-binding” criterion does have consequences

The criteria in Annex 3 do not constitute binding provisions in themselves; they reflect the authority’s interpretive position. Nonetheless, they have relevant practical effects:

• Tax audit report (dictamen fiscal). The certified public accountant issuing the report is required to state whether the taxpayer applied a criterion contrary to those contained in Annex 3 (Article 52 of the CFF).
• Reportable schemes. A scheme aimed at avoiding ISR withholding may trigger the characteristics set out in Articles 197 to 202 of the CFF, with a disclosure obligation.
• Business reason. If the interposed vehicle lacks a purpose other than the tax one, the authority may recharacterize the transaction under Article 5-A of the CFF.
• Joint and several liability. The withholding agent is liable for the tax not withheld under Article 26 of the CFF.

Conclusions

We recommend verifying the following points before the fiscal year-end:

• Payments to third parties that reach personnel. Identify disbursements to civil associations, companies, external savings funds, or unions whose funds end up in the hands of employees, partners, or shareholders.
• Consistency of the invoice. Review whether there are CFDIs for “administration services” whose amount bears a direct relationship to variable payroll or to the period’s bonuses.
• Incentive and bonus programs. Confirm that ISR withholdings are correctly made and remitted, and that exempt items fall within the scenarios and limits of Article 93 of the LISR.
• Generality requirement. Verify that social welfare benefits are granted on a general basis, in accordance with Article 27, section XI of the LISR.
• Pension plans. Criterion 42/ISR/PI addresses in an analogous manner payments to active employees charged to pension plans that in essence constitute taxable salary.

What does remain valid

The exempt items provided for in Article 93 of the LISR —savings fund, grocery vouchers, year-end bonus (aguinaldo), vacation premium, and other social welfare benefits— remain fully valid within their limits and requirements. The authority’s observation is directed at schemes that seek to replicate that effect through third parties.

GARCIA ACCOUNTANTS

At GARCIA we can carry out a review of your compensation and incentive schemes to confirm that withholdings, deductions, and credits are correctly supported, and to propose, where appropriate, the alternatives that the law itself offers within a compliance framework.

We remain at your service to discuss how this criterion applies to your company’s specific situation.

LR GARCIA ACCOUNTANTS, S.C.

Zapopan, Jalisco · July 2026

This bulletin is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax or legal advice for a particular case. Its application depends on the specific facts and circumstances of each taxpayer, so we recommend consulting us before making any decision.

Criterion 43/ISR/PI · First Amendment to Annex 3 of the RMF 2026 · DOF July 17, 2026

On July 17, 2026, the First Amendment to Annex 3 of the Miscellaneous Tax Resolution for 2026, which compiles the criteria on improper tax practices, was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation.

Among them, criterion 43/ISR/PI is maintained and reinforced. Under it, the SAT considers it an improper tax practice to deliver funds to employees, partners, or shareholders through civil associations, companies, or other third parties, under concepts such as labor incentives, bonuses, commissions, premiums, or special compensation, giving them the treatment of exempt income.

An important point of context

This criterion is not new: it already existed since 2024 under the code 43/ISR/NV. What changed is its designation —what were previously called “non-binding criteria” are now called “improper tax practices”— and its recent update. In other words, if your company operates a scheme of this type, the risk of a contingency would apply for the last 5 fiscal years.

The authority’s reasoning

The Income Tax Law recognizes as exempt only the income expressly provided for in its Article 93. Therefore, when an employee, partner, or shareholder receives funds derived from their relationship with the company, such amounts must be analyzed according to their true tax nature and not by the name assigned to them or the route they follow.

Put simply: interposing a third party does not change the nature of the income. If it is in substance wages, assimilated income, or dividends, it must be treated as such.

The authority further clarifies that NOM-035 does not require making monetary payments to employees, so invoking it to justify exempt compensation is improper.

Consequences the criterion warns of

The effect is not limited to the loss of the exemption. The criterion identifies simultaneous consequences for all participants:

Party	Consequence
Company	Obligation to withhold and remit the omitted ISR, with inflation adjustment, surcharges, and penalties. In addition, the payments made to the third party are not deductible and the VAT charged for such services is not creditable, as the strict indispensability requirement is not met.
Employee, partner, or shareholder	The funds received must be accrued for tax purposes; they do not enjoy any exemption.
Advisors and third parties	Those who participate in implementing these schemes are expressly identified as parties to the improper practice.

The result is a twofold negative effect: the company pays the ISR it failed to withhold and, in addition, loses the deduction of the payment made to the third party and the crediting of the corresponding VAT. The final cost usually exceeds that of having paid the item directly through payroll.

Why a “non-binding” criterion does have consequences

The criteria in Annex 3 do not constitute binding provisions in themselves; they reflect the authority’s interpretive position. Nonetheless, they have relevant practical effects:

• Tax audit report (dictamen fiscal). The certified public accountant issuing the report is required to state whether the taxpayer applied a criterion contrary to those contained in Annex 3 (Article 52 of the CFF).
• Reportable schemes. A scheme aimed at avoiding ISR withholding may trigger the characteristics set out in Articles 197 to 202 of the CFF, with a disclosure obligation.
• Business reason. If the interposed vehicle lacks a purpose other than the tax one, the authority may recharacterize the transaction under Article 5-A of the CFF.
• Joint and several liability. The withholding agent is liable for the tax not withheld under Article 26 of the CFF.

Conclusions

We recommend verifying the following points before the fiscal year-end:

• Payments to third parties that reach personnel. Identify disbursements to civil associations, companies, external savings funds, or unions whose funds end up in the hands of employees, partners, or shareholders.
• Consistency of the invoice. Review whether there are CFDIs for “administration services” whose amount bears a direct relationship to variable payroll or to the period’s bonuses.
• Incentive and bonus programs. Confirm that ISR withholdings are correctly made and remitted, and that exempt items fall within the scenarios and limits of Article 93 of the LISR.
• Generality requirement. Verify that social welfare benefits are granted on a general basis, in accordance with Article 27, section XI of the LISR.
• Pension plans. Criterion 42/ISR/PI addresses in an analogous manner payments to active employees charged to pension plans that in essence constitute taxable salary.

What does remain valid

The exempt items provided for in Article 93 of the LISR —savings fund, grocery vouchers, year-end bonus (aguinaldo), vacation premium, and other social welfare benefits— remain fully valid within their limits and requirements. The authority’s observation is directed at schemes that seek to replicate that effect through third parties.

GARCIA ACCOUNTANTS

At GARCIA we can carry out a review of your compensation and incentive schemes to confirm that withholdings, deductions, and credits are correctly supported, and to propose, where appropriate, the alternatives that the law itself offers within a compliance framework.

We remain at your service to discuss how this criterion applies to your company’s specific situation.

LR GARCIA ACCOUNTANTS, S.C.

Zapopan, Jalisco · July 2026

This bulletin is for informational purposes only and does not constitute tax or legal advice for a particular case. Its application depends on the specific facts and circumstances of each taxpayer, so we recommend consulting us before making any decision.