Skip to content
Supreme Court case law on SAT requirements for tax refunds
July 3, 2025
Ana Gabriela Vázquez
The past June 30, 2025, the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) issued a jurisprudence of great relevance for taxpayers who request tax refunds before the Tax Administration Service (SAT).
This is the Thesis 2nd/J. 33/2025, which establishes limits on the information requests that the tax authority can issue in this type of procedure.
What is a case law?
A jurisprudence is a mandatory criterion established by the SCJN (or other competent courts) when it resolves five cases in the same direction, with no other opposing criteria. Its function is to unify the interpretation of the law and guarantee legal certainty. In the tax field, case law is particularly relevant because it defines the limits of the authorities' actions, as in this case, the SAT regarding taxpayer rights.
A little context…
According to Article 22 of the Federal Tax Code (CFF), the SAT has a period of 40 business days to resolve a refund request, counting from the date the taxpayer submits said request. Also according to the same CFF, this period may be suspended up to two times, when the authority issues a letter requesting additional information to that attached to the refund request.
It's important to mention that the purpose of these additional information requests is to ensure that the SAT has sufficient information to validate the origin of the requested credit balance. However, in practice, the authority has issued these requests requesting information that has little (or nothing) to do with the tax refund the taxpayer is requesting.
What does jurisprudence establish?
The new jurisprudence of the SCJN establishes that:
"For the authority to carry out a second requirement related to requests for refund of undue payment or balance in favor, the taxpayer must have complied completely with what was requested in the first requirement.”
The above is justified by the fact that the second requests for information are to clarify or explain some data or document that the taxpayer has provided in the first request, and said data or documents generate additional doubts for the authority.
What is the practical impact for taxpayers?
This interpretation represents a significant change in administrative practice, as the SAT previously used requests as a tool to delay the resolution of refunds, generating uncertainty for taxpayers. While taxpayers already faced a certain level of pressure to gather all the information requested by the authority, this jurisprudence will increase this pressure, considering the length of the initial requests for information and the limited timeframe the taxpayer has to respond (20 business days).
This case law reinforces the fact that taxpayers must be extremely meticulous when preparing information to respond to an initial request for additional information. If any document is missing, no matter how small, the authority could dismiss the refund request, forcing the taxpayer to initiate a new refund request.
CB Strategy Recommendations
1. Complete documentation from the startSubmitting well-structured refund requests is key to avoiding unnecessary requests. Detailing the origin of the credit balance, with the corresponding documentary evidence, is key to avoiding an overly complex and/or lengthy initial request.
2. Punctual follow-up: Monitor the deadlines and dates for issuing and responding to requests to ensure that the authority complies with legal deadlines.
3. Specialized adviceHaving the support of tax refund experts can make all the difference in the face of an increasingly demanding SAT review.
In CB StrategyWe have developed an effective methodology for preparing and following up on VAT and income tax refund applications, anticipating potential review points and ensuring timely responses to any information requests. Does your company have outstanding balances that could be recovered? Contact us to help you maximize your liquidity while complying with all legal requirements.
Other News
Supreme Court case law on SAT requirements for tax refunds
Anticipating the 2025 Fiscal Year End: Key to Effective Planning.
SAT limits contracts valid as proof of address
Main aspects of the Third Resolution of Modifications to the RMF 2025
Join our community of experts and receive constant updates.
Stay up to date with the latest tax updates. Enter your email and subscribe to our newsletter to receive the latest news and access our experts' opinions and recommendations.