It is illegal to deny the deduction of interest for mortgage loans if the tax receipt was exhibited

The Law on Income Tax (Income Tax Law) provides that individuals to calculate their annual tax may deduct interest on mortgage loans. That is, the real interest actually paid in the year for mortgage loans for the acquisition of your home, contracted with the institutions that are part of the financial system. [Ley del ISR 151, fracción IV].

The foregoing applies provided that the total amount of credits granted by said property does not exceed 750 thousand investment units.

Interest deduction for mortgage loans

For his part, Regulation of the Income Tax Law states that they may also be considered deductible, the real interest actually paid in the year in question derived from mortgage loans contracted with federal and state public agencies [Reglamento de la Ley del ISR 252].

The same legal system provides that the aforementioned institutions and agencies must record the following in the tax receipt that they provide to taxpayers [Reglamento de la Ley del ISR 253]:

I. The name, address and code in the Federal Taxpayers Registry (RFC) of the mortgage debtor.
II. The location of the mortgaged property.
III. The nominal interest accrued, as well as the real interest paid in the year.

The tax authority rejected the return of the balance in favor

In this context, a taxpayer requested the refund of the balance in favor of ISR, but the Tax Administration Service (SAT) denied it. The tax authority argued that from the review carried out to its institutional systems, it warned that there are no tax receipts that protect the amount deducted for “real interest actually paid for mortgage loans (home).”

It was declared illegal for the authority to deny the request

However, a court found it illegal for the tax authority to deny the return of the balance in favor requested. This is due to the fact that in the application process, the taxpayer exhibited the “proof of interest paid for the added Fovissste mortgage loan”.

The court indicated that the record contained the data listed above. That is, the name, address, code in the RFC, the location of the mortgaged property, the nominal interest accrued, as well as the real interest paid in the year.

If there is no record of the voucher, it is not a cause attributable to the taxpayer

In addition, the court considered that if the tax authority does not have a record of the tax receipts in its institutional systems, it is not a cause attributable to the taxpayer but to the one obliged to issue them. Especially if said receipt was not challenged or branded false by the tax authority.

For this reason, the court indicated that if there is any irregularity related to the registration, on the part of the issuer of the aforementioned voucher, it cannot have a negative impact on the legal sphere of the taxpayer.

This was determined by the Second North-East Regional Chamber of the State of Mexico of the Federal Court of Administrative Justice (TFJA) when resolving an administrative contentious trial. And the Taxpayer Defense Attorney (Prodecon) took up this jurisdictional criterion and published it on its website.

You can review the jurisdictional criteria published by Prodecon here / Year: 2021 / With this search criteria: Income, personal deductions / Code: 37/2021 / Publication: May 28, 2021.

Subscribe to The Treasury Analyst (news and jurisprudence in tax and labor matters) and to our YouTube channel.

Express your opinion

We have not been able to validate your subscription.

Your subscription has been made.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.