“n
Economist Jaime Aristy Escuder warned that there is a legal controversy regarding the way in which the General Directorate of Internal Taxes (DGII) has been calculating the tax base of the Selective Consumption Tax (ISC) applied to alcoholic beverages, a situation that has given rise to what he calls the “rebellious taxpayer.”
n” “nIn an opinion piece published under the title “The rebellious taxpayer,” Aristy maintains that Dominican tax legislation establishes that the ISC for alcoholic beverages must be calculated based on the retail price, a criterion that, as he claims, was defined since the creation of the Tax Code and subsequently clarified through regulations and administrative provisions.
n” “nThe economist explains that, for years, the DGII interpreted that the tax base should include all components of the product, from the liquid content to containers, labels, caps, packaging, and other elements associated with its commercialization. However, he argues that an amendment introduced by Law 30-26 reaffirms that the calculation must be based on the final retail price to the consumer.
n” “nAccording to Aristy, this difference in interpretation has generated millionaire litigation between the tax administration and companies in the alcoholic beverage sector. He points out that some companies have accumulated tax claims for billions of pesos derived from the methodology used by the DGII between 2019 and 2022.
More Read
The columnist reveals that a company obtained a favorable ruling from the Superior Administrative Court, after which it reached agreements with the DGII to extinguish tax obligations related to the application of the tax. However, he indicates that subsequently the tax administration allowed another company to use a lower tax base, which, in his opinion, created a situation of unequal treatment compared to the rest of the taxpayers.
n” “nFaced with this scenario, Aristy proposes the emergence of the so-called “rebellious taxpayer”: a taxpayer who decides to depart from the current administrative interpretation and directly apply what they understand the law establishes. In this case, he maintains that alcoholic beverage producers could declare the ISC using exclusively the retail sale price of the liquids contained in the bottles, excluding other commercial components.
n” “nFor the economist, this position does not constitute tax evasion, but rather an exercise of legal defense based on the principle of legality and the supremacy of the law over administrative interpretations. Likewise, he considers that the recent legal reform offers sufficient clarity to support that position.
More Read
Aristy concludes that the debate transcends the fiscal sphere and raises a discussion about legal certainty, tax equality, and the scope of the interpretative powers of the public administration. In his view, any difference between taxpayers must be resolved through uniform rules that ensure everyone is treated under the same legal criteria.
n”
