I've always been under the impression both are resident permits. Now, the hard card format makes that clear, with the new non immigrant document (FM3) reading that the holder is a temporary resident of Mexico, and the immigrant document (FM2) reading that the holder is a permanent resident of Mexico.
I don't know...so for that matter, the holder of an FMM is also a temporary resident. Not saying you're wrong....just better check it out. I also see where no one (not even the attorneys) have been told that the ownership/residency requirement to avoid capital gains on a dwelling, had been changed to 5 years, instead of 2. This is the rumor here in Veracruz. I wonder if it is just a "State" thing. No matter...if they say 2 years in Q.R., just "go with the flow," and be happy. For those of you who have built a home, be sure to keep ALL your receipts. I hear that they are not picky when it comes to determining what is actual construction cost, and costs for normal repairs. I was wondering about that, since my original construction was so bad in so many areas, that much of it had to be re-done. I am not worried for any capital gains on this house!!!
What we're talking about when it comes to residency in this case is legal residency; that is, residency as defined by Mexican Law. When INM started putting that language I referred to earlier on the back of the cards, it just made explicit what was already implied in the law and structure of the immigration process.
I went to Hacienda the other day and took my buddy Ruben with me to make sure I understood what was going on. I wanted to start the process for an RFC. The lady told us that foreignors are exempt for the first $7 million pesos of the selling price. This was a mas o menos number as the actual number fluctuates daily, based on the UDI x $1.5 million. The UDI on Wed, April 25, was 4.593802. What a can of worms. I am going to see my lawyer right this moment.
Interesting, if true, T.J. I can find no reference in the Mexican Law to this big exemption, but from years of experience I've learned never to ignore the possibility it is hidden in some obscure corner. On the subject of proving primary residence so as to be eligible for the capital gains tax exemption we spoken of earlier on this thread, I have found the following:
With regards to your quote, I am wondering why the escritura would not be proof enough for actual purchase date (I'm sure it is) and then they can just check your passport to see how much time you have been out of Mexico in that 2-year period. (with the new cards, they now are supposed to stamp your passport with salidas y entradas.) This is a very interesting topic for me, since I have a house for sale in Veracruz. But I shall bow out of the discussion, since it again appears that even though these are supposed to be Federal laws, .....that there is a difference between various States in terms of (shall we say) interpretation? It seems Cancun/Quintana Roo has its own set of laws/rules/regs., apart from the rest of the country, and I could cite several examples...but won't.
The difference is that, when it comes to claiming the exemption from capital gains taxes, the proof required is not of time spent in the country, it's of whether the property has been used as your primary residence. Even the detailed proof quoted here as being required obviously wouldn't be sufficient to prove in a court of law that the property has actually been used as the primary residence, it's just the things the Notary might ask for before concluding you're entitled to the exemption. My impression is that they are not sticklers when it comes to this. For example, and hopefully without blowing anyone's cover, the previous owner claimed the property as his primary residence though he'd never actually lived in it, by offering proofs such as the ones mentioned here. As for the observation that differences exist in the application of the laws in the different states, that certainly seems to be true; plus, many of the laws which regulate taxes are set at the state level, it seems.
TJ.....Please let us know what you find out, regarding this 7.5 million exemption. As said, my house is for sale but I do not have an RFC, either. I'm wondering if I even need one. Like I said, little if any capital gains.
Windknot, my lawyer (in the NP's office we chose to handle our purchase) says you do need a tax number to claim the exemption, but it may be worthwhile to check, locally, as well, in case the practice there is different.
T.J., did you get a chance to check with your lawyer about that? I haven't found a reference to that number, and my lawyer insists what she told me about it is correct. One thing I'd like to remind the readers is that, in Mexico at least, it's often form over substance when it comes to the law: the previous owner proved his use of the property as his residence with nothing more than an electric bill in his name, plus his tax number. He'd never even bothered to change the designation on the city tax records to show himself as owner until shortly before we closed on the property. As for having a tax number, without checking I suspect Mexico is like many countries in the fact that, if you have no income to declare, there is no obligation to file a tax declaration. This is true, so far as I know, even for Mexican citizens who, if they just work for salaries on which taxes are withheld, have no duty to file, annually or otherwise. Those who want to be sure can check with their lawyers about that.
