 |
| KROM |
The Special Tax on Production and Services (IEPS) is
emerging as one of the most relevant instruments within the 2026 Economic
Package, particularly due to the adjustments proposed in the Federal Revenue
Law Initiative (ILIF). This set of fiscal measures seeks to increase revenue by
updating the rates applicable to various consumer goods considered harmful or
with high social externalities, although the real motivations behind these
changes have generated debate among specialists.
According to the initiative, flavored beverages will be the
product with the largest increase in tax burden, as their rate will practically
double, from 1.64 pesos to 3.08 pesos per liter. A similar measure will affect
the tobacco sector, where the ad valorem tax on cigars and other manufactured
tobacco products will gradually increase from 160% to 200% by 2030. These
changes will be accompanied by increased taxes on gambling and the creation of
a new tax on video games with violent content, a measure unprecedented in
Mexican fiscal policy.
The official rationale behind these increases is based on
promoting public health and reducing the consumption of harmful goods, a policy
commonly referred to as corrective taxation or taxes with a social purpose.
However, the current design of the ILIF does not guarantee that the additional
resources raised will be effectively allocated to health or prevention
programs. As long as an explicit budget allocation is not established in the
IEPS Law, the Federal Fiscal Code (CFF), or the General Health Law (LGS), the
use of these funds will remain subject to executive discretion, limiting their
potential as a public health policy tool.
In this context, fiscal analysts warn that, although the
government's rhetoric prioritizes health and consumer regulation, the
revenue-raising objective appears to predominate. The increase in IEPS
contributions could translate into a significant increase in revenue, but
without a clear mechanism for transparency and allocation, the positive impact
on public welfare would be marginal. Furthermore, the impact on consumers could
be regressive, disproportionately affecting lower-income households, who spend
a larger proportion of their spending on these types of products.
The new tax on video games with violent content, for its
part, introduces a controversial precedent in taxation for regulatory purposes.
While it is argued that it seeks to discourage exposure to digital violence,
the measure opens an ethical and legal debate about the limits of the State's
taxing power. This raises a fundamental question: could the government extend
the IEPS in the future to other cultural or entertainment products, such as
music, series, or films with violent content or content considered socially
harmful?
If this trend materializes, the IEPS could evolve from a
consumption tax into an instrument of cultural and social control, raising
questions about proportionality, freedom of consumption, and the State's fiscal
neutrality. In short, the planned IEPS reform for 2026 not only reshapes excise
tax policy but also reopens the discussion about the ethical, social, and
revenue-raising functions of Mexican tax policy./E.ESGLOTAC