they got caught

Maybe it's political in Chris's casa........jajajajaja.

Hell, Deb and I have Oral Sex every night........we talk about it and FALL ASLEEP!   Gawd, Bob, still crackin ma self up!

And all along I thought it was when you and Deb passed in the hallway and exchanged "Fuck You"s

SunFan

The agency that levied the fines is an administrative agency, not a court of law. The agents and companies did appeal the administrative decision and fine with amparos and appeals to the administrative agency and they did not prevail. The SAT office was in the area notifying the people of the fines and this only happens when there are fines to pay (meaning somebody lost the fight) and when the resolution is final and there are no more appeals based upon the merits of the case.

Those who were fined may file amparos but they will have to post a bond and pay attorney fees which may not be worth it for the smaller fine amounts.

Here in Mexico the administrative agencies are very random as to how they fine people and companies. Some people literally get away with murder and others face fines and closures for not posting the price of peanuts.

SunFan wrote:And all along I thought it was when you and Deb passed in the hallway and exchanged "Fuck You"s

SunFan

George, that is known as Hallway sex!

"appeals to the administrative agency and they did not prevail"

True...but what happened when they appealed through the judicial system?

That first statement is like appealing to the traffic cop that just wrote you a ticket.

....and how far up the judicial ladder has this travelled?

From what I recall from reading the final resolution, they did appeals to the administrative agency and then the federal courts. I don´t have the resolution in front of me but it did appear from reading the resolution that they exhausted their remedies but then again there could be things that were not directly transcribed.

This statement of theirs I posted sounds like they think they have further appeals but what I'm seeing here and elsewhere is that they are at the end of the road.

Has anyone hired a GIL realtor lately that refused to negotiate commission?

slainte39 wrote:

Osoprehistorico wrote:Just doesn't seem fair to me that the seller has to pay the IVA on their commission.  

The customer always pays the IVA, when applicable, one way or the other, no matter if it's Century 21, Walmart, Ajijic Tango,
Telmex, CFE, Coldwell Banker, Oxxo, or you name it.  That's the way a sales or value added tax works.
The real estate people have to pay the ISR, or income tax on what they earn, after deductions.
It might not be fair..... whatever that is.... but I think it's the same in the US and Canada.
Try telling an automobile dealership that the IVA isn't fair.....you might get sympathy.  

Hopefully, the day will never come when then buyer has to pay IVA on the purchase price of the property. That would be a real "OUCH".
.....hard enough to keep ISR taxes off of the seller.

I am talking about the seller paying the IVA on the realtor's commission. The commission is a loss to the seller, not a gain.

IVA is not about a loss or a gain, it's about the sale of a product or service and the consumer of the service, in this case, the seller of the property, has to pay the IVA.
If Walmart, or any retail business sells something at a loss, i.e. loss leader, the customer, or buyer. still has to pay IVA.
The real estate agent sells his service to the property owner....it doesn't matter if that owner sells at a loss or not.
It doesn't matter if the real estate agent's expenses were more than his commission. All that matters is that the consumer pays the 16% IVA, which goes to the government, no matter who loses or gains.
Gains and losses are taxed under the ISR tax regimen.
If you don't believe me, go talk to any C.P. or someone at Hacienda.

slainte39 wrote:IVA is not about a loss or a gain, it's about the sale of a product or service and the consumer of the service, in this case, the seller of the property, has to pay the IVA.
If Walmart, or any retail business sells something at a loss, i.e. loss leader, the customer, or buyer. still has to pay IVA.
The real estate agent sells his service to the property owner....it doesn't matter if that owner sells at a loss or not.
It doesn't matter if the real estate agent's expenses were more than his commission. All that matters is that the consumer pays the 16% IVA, which goes to the government, no matter who loses or gains.
Gains and losses are taxed under the ISR tax regimen.
If you don't believe me, go talk to any C.P. or someone at Hacienda.

I am still confused so please help me get this figured out. If I sell my house, there are taxes to be paid. In addition, the broker gets a commission on the sale. As it now stands, the seller has to pay IVA on the commission the broker gets. In essence, the seller pays the broker's taxes and the broker pays nada on his commission.

The agent pays an INCOME TAX on the commission they are paid. IVA is a different tax.

Osoprehistorico wrote:

slainte39 wrote:IVA is not about a loss or a gain, it's about the sale of a product or service and the consumer of the service, in this case, the seller of the property, has to pay the IVA.
If Walmart, or any retail business sells something at a loss, i.e. loss leader, the customer, or buyer. still has to pay IVA.
The real estate agent sells his service to the property owner....it doesn't matter if that owner sells at a loss or not.
It doesn't matter if the real estate agent's expenses were more than his commission. All that matters is that the consumer pays the 16% IVA, which goes to the government, no matter who loses or gains.
Gains and losses are taxed under the ISR tax regimen.
If you don't believe me, go talk to any C.P. or someone at Hacienda.

I am still confused so please help me get this figured out.  If I sell my house, there are taxes to be paid.  In addition, the broker gets a commission on the sale.  As it now stands, the seller has to pay IVA on the commission the broker gets.  In essence, the seller pays the broker's taxes and the broker pays nada on his commission.

The IVA is not the broker's tax, it is a tax paid by the consumer of a service, in this case, the seller.....period,
Then the broker/agent are liable for the ISR, or for your understanding, income tax.
Don't know how else to explain it to you.

IVA= Impuesto al Valor Agregado (value added tax)
ISR= Impuesto Sobre la Renta (income or capital gains tax)

Yes, here there is a sales tax on services, not only good sold. I pay IVA tax on my attorney fees paid and factor it into the price the public pays. Then on top of that income tax ISR is paid.

I also recall that there was a restraining order prohibiting the activities that led up to this mess.

Thanks all for the clarification. Now I understand.

Intercasa wrote:Yes, here there is a sales tax on services, not only good sold.  I pay IVA tax on my attorney fees paid and factor it into the price the public pays.  Then on top of that income tax ISR is paid.    

Do you issue facturas separating your fee from the IVA for anyone needing the IVA credit for their own tax purposes?  Providing, of course, they are duly registered with Hacienda with an RFC number.

That's how real estate companies do it, as many times the commission factura is used to reduce the sellers ISR tax on terrenos without construction; properties where the terreno/land in relation to the construction, exceeds the legal limit for exemption; for anyone where ownership does not meet the required length of time; or foreigners who do not have the requisite immigration status.

Once a facture is issued, there isn't any "tax dodging".

Anyone know when Justus listings will be accepted and posted on MLS  Lakeside>

I issue facturas to people who need them and if nobody asks I deposit the money and have to issue a general factura and pay IVA putting a generic RFC number. I do one or two per month to the public to keep my bookeeping easy.

Did anyone read the article in the Lake Chapala Reporter? There is an interview with Justus. I don't subscribe but would be interested in someone posting the info. Thanks.

So would I..

I do not know what Mexico is like but in Canada trying to get the money from fines imposed is sometimes harder then getting the injunction. What is the procedure for collecting the money for these fines from the companies and individuals in Mexico.

I would like to know why the extra IVA tax is not shown on the listing-
My realtor in the states charged me 5%, split the commission with the realtor that sold the house, and that was that- no added expense or commission and the IVA tax IS part of the commission! Expenses are supposed to be less in Mexico- right? Why the extra 2% commission for the sale and the added tax of IVA actually hidden from the seller? The commission becomes 8+% with the IVA- a really huge amount. compared to the States.

Calgary: This money is not going to individuals but to the government who has clout.

Mrs. Rupert: The sales contract states the seller will pay the IVA on the commission as well as the commission itself. If it does not, the seller is only responsible for the conditions in the contract.

I understand where the money goes- When you talk to a realtor they do not mention that there is an IVA tax that has to be paid. It is in the contract, but not pointed out by a prospective realtor before the contract is signed. I think the realtors have been unfair to their clients- why the very high commission rate? Their expenses are surely not higher than NOB.

they get it because people pay it mrs. rupert

In all fairness to the real estate agents, properties here take a long, long time to sell on average and one year on the market is the norm in many cases. They need to advertise and market through a number of sources and that costs, then clients can change realtors after an agent has spent some serious $$$.

Even at the current percentages many of the real estate companies are taking losses.