Skip to content
Close
SEARCH

HOW PRODENSA USED A CONCLUSIVE AGREEMENT TO RESOLVE A COMPLEX FOREIGN TRADE AUDIT

A manufacturer facing $434.3 million MXN in observations validated 98.4% of the reviewed customs value and secured penalty relief.

PROJECT
Foreign trade audit defense for IMMEX manufacturer via PRODECON conclusive agreement
WHAT WE DID
Strategic negotiation, Annex 24 technical analysis, legal review, PRODECON filing
CLIENT
Confidential manufacturing company operating under the IMMEX program in Mexico
TIMELINE
Audit opened April 2025, payment completed mid-2026, resolved in months

PROJECT INFORMATION

When SAT opened a foreign trade audit in April 2025, the client was already working with Prodensa on an Annex 24 diagnostic and reconstruction of its inventory control system.

The audit focused on temporary imports made during fiscal year 2021. By March 2026, SAT had issued observations involving 193 import declarations and approximately $434.3 million MXN in customs value, based on the presumption that certain temporarily imported merchandise had not been properly returned abroad.

Rather than treating the observations as a conventional written-response exercise, Prodensa assessed the technical evidence,

legal position, timing and potential financial impact to determine the most effective resolution strategy.

The team recommended pursuing a Conclusive Agreement before PRODECON, allowing the company and SAT to address the observations through a structured process in which PRODECON served as an intermediary.

The strategy produced a significant result: 98.4% of the reviewed universe was ultimately recognized as legitimately returned, while penalty relief reduced the client's final payable amount from approximately $6.29 million to $3.31 million MXN.

The Problem: the Audit Notice

For an IMMEX manufacturer, a foreign trade audit can create exposure well beyond the amount initially questioned by the authority.

In this case, SAT's observations covered 193 import declarations representing $434.3 million MXN in customs value. The matter required a detailed reconstruction of Annex 24 and inventory records to demonstrate the return of temporarily imported merchandise.

At the same time, the client needed to protect its broader compliance position. A determined tax liability could create additional risks for authorizations and registrations critical to its Mexican operation, including its IMMEX program, Importers Registry and VAT/IEPS Certification.

The objective was therefore not simply to challenge the amount observed. It was to identify the strongest resolution strategy, substantiate the client's position and close the matter while minimizing financial and operational exposure.

Key Challenges

  • $434 million MXN in customs value initially observed across 193 import declarations
  • Complex Annex 24 and inventory-control records requiring technical reconstruction
  • Potential impact on critical IMMEX and foreign trade authorizations
  • Strict procedural timelines requiring a timely strategic decision
  • Multiple potential routes for resolving the observations and obtaining penalty relief

The Prodensa Solution

Deep Annex24 technical analysis.

Before determining how to address SAT's findings, Prodensa conducted a detailed review of the client's Annex 24 records and the transactions included in the audit.

The analysis uncovered duplicated items within the authority's observations. By identifying and documenting those inconsistencies, Prodensa reduced the reviewed amount by approximately $43.7 million MXN, from $434.3 million to approximately $390.6 million MXN.

The team then reviewed the 193 import declarations and supporting documentation to establish which temporary imports had been properly returned.

This technical work became the foundation of the client's position throughout the resolution process.

Define the appropriate resolution strategy.

In parallel with the technical analysis, Prodensa's legal team evaluated the basis of SAT's observations, the applicable regulations and the procedural alternatives available to the company.

Based on that assessment, Prodensa recommended pursuing a Conclusive Agreement through PRODECON rather than continuing exclusively through the conventional exchange of written positions with the auditing authority.

The Conclusive Agreement process created a structured channel for the taxpayer and SAT to review the disputed operations with PRODECON participating as an intermediary.

This allowed the discussion to focus directly on the technical evidence supporting the client's position while suspending the applicable audit deadlines during the procedure.

Substantiate the client's position before SAT and PRODECON.

Prodensa supported the company throughout the Conclusive Agreement process, presenting the technical and documentary evidence required to demonstrate the return of the merchandise under review.

Following working sessions and the submission of additional information requested during the process, SAT recognized $384.4 million MXN as properly returned (equivalent to 98.4% of the reviewed universe).

Only approximately $6.1 million MXN, or 1.6% of the reviewed amount, remained unproven.

Evaluate penalty relief and close the matter.

Once the remaining liability had been defined, Prodensa evaluated the available alternatives for penalty relief and modeled their financial impact so the client could determine the most appropriate path to closure.

The final liability, including contributions, surcharges and penalties, was approximately $6.29 million MXN.

Through the applicable penalty-relief mechanism, the amount ultimately payable was reduced to approximately $3.31 million MXN.

That represented approximately $2.98 million MXN in penalty savings and a 47% reduction in the final amount payable.

Prodensa then supported the client through the payment and closing process, as well as the subsequent steps required to maintain its foreign trade compliance position.

A multi-dimensional process, driven on a schedule.

Date Milestone
April 2025 SAT audit opened on FY2021 temporary imports
March 2026 Oficio de observaciones received: 193 declarations, $434.3M observed
April 2026 Conclusive agreement request filed with PRODECON; Art. 50 deadlines suspended
June 2026 Working session: client, SAT and PRODECON at the same table
June 2026 Additional information submitted at SAT's request
July 2026 Authority reports to PRODECON: the great majority of the return is recognized

 

The Results

The strategy combined technical analysis, legal assessment and the PRODECON Conclusive Agreement process to achieve a resolution that significantly reduced the client's financial exposure while protecting the continuity of its Mexican operation.
$434.3M Initial customs value under observation (MXN)
$43.7M Eliminated after technical analysis (MXN)
98.4% Recognized as legitimately returned
$2.98M Saved through penalty relief

The Positive Impacts of the Results

Financial Impact

The final liability was reduced from approximately $6.29 million MXN to $3.31 million MXN, resulting in nearly $3 million MXN in penalty savings.

Compliance & Operational Impact

Resolving the matter allowed the client to maintain a sound foreign trade compliance position while protecting authorizations and registrations essential to its IMMEX operation.

Prodensa Tips

For any company operating under IMMEX that receives notice of a SAT foreign trade audit:

Go to experts immediately. Not after the first response, and not after the statement of observations.  
Respond Promptly Speed is not only about deadlines. Every month an audit stays open is a month of administrative cost, operational disruption, and exposure to collateral consequences.  
Understand precisely what the audit is about. The scope determines the strategy. Misreading it costs you the case before you begin.  
Answer exactly what is asked: no more, no less. Incomplete responses fail. Over-disclosure opens issues the authority had not raised.  
Check the authority's arithmetic before you check your own. In this case the opening observation was overstated by $43.7 million pesos because of duplicated entries. An authority's number is a starting position, not a fact.  
Do the technical analysis before your respond. Without a deep Annex 24 and inventory control analysis, everything is left to the authority's presumption. With it, you know where the authority is heading, what it may find, and where it has made errors of its own.  
Know that responding is not your only option. A conclusive agreement before PRODECON lets you sit down with the authority, with a neutral body observing, either to demonstrate the operations were read incorrectly or to regularize a position you now recognize was wrong. It suspends the audit's statutory clock while you do it, and its frequently the faster route.  
Model the routes to penalty relief before you decide. There is more than one path, and they do not carry identical terms. Know all of them before choosing.  

SPEAK WITH A FOREIGN TRADE AUDIT SPECIALIST

Prodensa has supported foreign manufacturers operating in Mexico for +40 years, including IMMEX compliance, Annex24 and Annex30 control, and audit defense.
SCHEDULE A MEETING