Uncategorized

Qualified Entity under Law 526: The Framework That Already Exists and What the Regulation Will Define

Qualified Entity under Law 526: The Framework That Already Exists and What the Regulation Will Define | EDTIJEDTIJ · Legal Analysis · Law 526 of 2026

Qualified Entity under Law 526: The Framework That Already Exists and What the Regulation Will Define

Four confirmed pillars, thresholds pending regulation: what can be analyzed now

June 2026 · EDTIJ — International Tax, Legal and Labor Law Firm

Law 526 of 2026 has established the regulatory framework for economic substance in Panama. The executive regulation — with a 90-day deadline from promulgation — is expected approximately in August. For the lawyer advising corporate and patrimonial structures, the practical question is not whether to wait or act: it is knowing which part of the analysis can be done now and which part depends on the regulation.

This distinction matters. The lawyer who waits for the regulation to begin the diagnostic arrives in August with no groundwork done. The one who acts without distinguishing what is defined from what is not advises on uncertain terrain. The right path is the middle one: work with the existing framework, being transparent about what remains pending.

The Four Pillars of the Qualified Entity

Established by Law 526

Law 526 defines two categories of entities: the Qualified Entity — one that demonstrates economic substance in Panama and maintains the 0% rate on passive foreign-source income — and the Non-Qualified Entity, subject to a 15% rate on that income.

To be a Qualified Entity, the law establishes four pillars that must be met proportionally to the nature and scale of the activity:

Pillar 1
Qualified Personnel in Panama
Employees with the knowledge and authority necessary to perform the entity’s core business activities from Panama.
Pillar 2
Physical Facilities in Panama
Adequate physical facilities for carrying out the activity, whether owned or leased, located in the country.
Pillar 3
Strategic Decisions from Panama
Oversight and management decisions regarding core activities occur in Panama, with appropriate documentation.
Pillar 4
Proportional Operational Expenses
Operational expenses in Panama are proportional to the entity’s level of activity and the income it generates.

These four pillars are the framework. What the executive regulation will define are the specific thresholds for each — detailed further below.

The Pure Holding Entity Exception

Established by Law 526

Law 526 establishes a differentiated regime for the pure holding entity: one whose core activity consists of holding participations in other entities and earning income derived from those participations — dividends, capital gains, interest on loans to related entities.

For the pure holding entity, the substance standard is lighter. The law primarily emphasizes the qualified personnel requirement for managing the holdings, without the same scale of physical presence or proportional expenses required of entities with operating activities.

This is relevant for many Panamanian patrimonial structures that function essentially as holding vehicles. Identifying whether an entity qualifies as a pure holding is one of the first steps in the analysis — and it is an analysis that can be performed now, without waiting for the regulation.

The Outsourcing of Core Activities

Provision in the law · Conditions pending regulation

Law 526 expressly contemplates the possibility that an entity may contract its core activities to service providers in Panama — known as outsourcing of activities. This provision is significant: it recognizes that an entity can demonstrate substance through qualified local providers, without maintaining its own personnel.

However, the conditions under which this provision applies will be defined by the executive regulation: which activities may be outsourced, what controls and oversight the entity must maintain, what documentation is required, and what qualifications the providers must hold.

The prudent advice for now: do not structure around outsourcing until the regulation is available. The provision exists and is a relevant option for August. It is not an option that can be implemented today with legal certainty.

What the Executive Regulation Will Define

Expected: August 2026

The executive regulation, with a 90-day deadline from Law 526’s promulgation (May 28, 2026), is expected approximately in August. It is anticipated to define, among other things:

  • Minimum personnel thresholds by activity type and income level generated
  • Definition of adequate physical facilities and whether shared or coworking spaces may qualify
  • Documentation mechanisms to demonstrate that strategic decisions are made from Panama
  • Proportional operational expense ratios by sector or activity category
  • Outsourcing conditions: eligible activities, provider requirements, required level of supervision
  • Differentiated standards by entity type, sector, or income volume

What Can and Should Be Done Now

Pre-Regulation Diagnostic Steps

1
Confirm scope Does the structure constitute a multinational group? If the law does not apply to the structure, the substance analysis is irrelevant. This step does not require waiting for the regulation.
2
Identify the track: pure holding or general regime The category determines the applicable standard. A pure holding entity has lighter requirements — already defined in the law. Identifying the correct category is the second step of the analysis.
3
Document the current state How many employees does the entity have in Panama, and in what roles? What facilities does it have? Where and how are management decisions documented? What are the operational expenses in Panama relative to income? This snapshot is the starting point for the compliance analysis when the regulation arrives.
4
Implement decision documentation Regardless of the thresholds the regulation will define, documenting that strategic decisions are made from Panama — board minutes, meeting records, correspondence — is a practice that can and should be formalized now.
5
Identify evident gaps Even without the regulation’s minimum thresholds, an entity with no employees in Panama and no physical facilities has an obvious gap. Evident gaps can be identified without waiting for exact numbers.

The Distinction Lawyers Must Draw with Clients

Law 526’s normative framework allows the lawyer to conduct a pillar diagnostic: what does the entity have today in terms of personnel, facilities, decisions and expenses in Panama? What cannot yet be determined with certainty is whether that current state is sufficient — because that depends on the thresholds the regulation will set.

The honest communication with the client is: “We can analyze where you stand today. We can identify the evident gaps. We can prepare you for the August analysis. What we cannot yet tell you is whether the exact number of employees or the expense level you currently have is sufficient — because that number is not yet in the law. It will be in the regulation.”

That transparency is not advisory weakness. It is legal precision. And it is exactly what the client needs to hear from a trusted counsel.

Economic Substance Diagnostic — EDTIJ

At EDTIJ we conduct the economic substance diagnostic under Law 526’s current framework: we analyze scope, identify the entity’s category, document the current state against the four pillars, and identify evident gaps. We leave the structure ready for the compliance analysis when the regulation becomes available in August.

We work with certainty on what the law already establishes. We are transparent about what the regulation has not yet defined.

info@edtij.com  ·  +507-340-6324  ·  www.edtij.com

Marisel Della Togna · Partner, EDTIJ — International Tax, Legal and Labor Law Firm

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Law 526 of 2026 is subject to executive regulation expected approximately in August 2026. Specific compliance analyses must be conducted based on the regulations in force at the time of consultation. For advice regarding your particular structure, contact EDTIJ.

Does Law 526 Apply to Your Structure? The Analysis to Complete Before August

<Does Law 526 Apply to Your Structure? The Analysis to Complete Before August | EDTIJ
EDTIJ Panama

Does Law 526 apply to your structure? The analysis to complete before August

Law 526 has a specific applicability threshold. Before analyzing any pillar of economic substance, there is a prior question that determines whether everything else applies.

July 2026 · By Marisel Della Togna, EDTIJ Panama

The executive regulation of Law 526 is expected in August 2026. Many clients arrive at the firm with a certainty that may be premature: “I know the law applies to me — help me comply.”

Before analyzing whether a structure has qualified personnel, physical facilities, or documented strategic decisions made from Panama, there is a prior question that conditions everything else: does this structure constitute a multinational group under Law 526?

If the answer is no, the substance analysis may be unnecessary. If the answer is yes, the substance analysis is the next step. If the answer is not immediate, documenting why is exactly the work for this week.

What defines a multinational group under Law 526

Law 526 does not apply to every structure with assets abroad or a presence in more than one country. It applies to entities that form part of a multinational group.

The law defines a multinational group as a group of two or more entities, linked by ownership or control, that are tax residents in different jurisdictions, including the parent company, its subsidiaries, and its permanent establishments.

Three elements must be present:

  • 1
    Two or more entities — not natural persons, but legal entities. A natural person with assets abroad does not by itself constitute a multinational group under this criterion.
  • 2
    Linked by ownership or control — the entities must be related to each other. A Panamanian company and a US LLC owned by the same person are candidates; two unrelated companies are not.
  • 3
    Tax residents in different jurisdictions — each entity in the group must have tax residency in a jurisdiction, and those jurisdictions must be different from one another.

If any of the three elements is not clearly met, the analysis requires additional detail before concluding that the law applies.

Cases where the analysis is more straightforward

More clearly within scope
  • A Panamanian company that controls subsidiaries in Colombia, Mexico, Costa Rica, or other countries in the region, with related-party transactions
  • A holding company in Panama with operating entities in different jurisdictions
  • A structure with a permanent establishment in Panama and affiliated entities abroad
  • A family business group with entities in multiple countries under common control
Requires additional analysis
  • A structure with a single Panamanian entity and foreign assets but no formally established affiliated entities in other jurisdictions
  • Investment funds, private foundations, and trusts with holdings in foreign entities
  • Structures with entities in jurisdictions where the concept of tax residency has particular characteristics
  • Wealth vehicles where the ownership or control link is not evident in the documentation

A note on definitions still being developed

Practice Point · Regulation Pending

The concept of tax residency for entities, as drafted in Law 526, raises technical questions that the executive regulation will need to clarify. There are types of structures and vehicles for which the determination of tax residency in any given jurisdiction is not immediate.

The prudent approach, until the regulation resolves those points, is not to assume that the law does not apply without having documented the analysis that leads to that conclusion. The cost of having conducted a preventive analysis is lower than the cost of having assumed it was unnecessary when it turns out that it was not.

The scope analysis as a first engagement

For structures where the applicability of Law 526 is not immediate, the first engagement should be the scope analysis: a document that maps the structure, identifies the entities that could constitute the group, evaluates the ownership and control links, and concludes whether the law applies — with the documentation to support that conclusion.

That analysis is the starting point for any subsequent work. And it is what protects both the client and the attorney if the application of the law is questioned in the future.

With the executive regulation expected in August 2026, the time available to complete this analysis before the full regulatory framework is in place is shrinking each week.

EDTIJ · Law 526 Scope Analysis

Before beginning an economic substance analysis, confirm whether Law 526 applies to your structure. Our team conducts the scope analysis as a standalone service, with a document that maps your structure, evaluates the three multinational group criteria, and documents the conclusion.

Contact us before August: info@edtij.com · EDTIJ Panama

This article is informational in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Law 526 of 2026 is subject to executive regulation expected in August 2026. Specific compliance analyses must be conducted based on the circumstances of each structure and the regulations in force at the time of consultation. For advice on your specific situation, contact a licensed attorney in Panama directly.

Private Interest Foundations and Law 526: What the Family Office Client Needs to Know

Patrimonial Planning  ·  June 2026

Private Interest Foundations and Law 526: What the Family Office Client Needs to Know | EDTIJ
Patrimonial Planning  ·  June 2026

Private Interest Foundations and Law 526: What the Family Office Client Needs to Know

Law 526 changed Panama’s tax landscape, but it did not eliminate patrimonial planning tools. The Private Interest Foundation remains valid — when you understand its position in the new framework.

The enactment of Law No. 526 on May 28, 2026 generated an understandable reaction among many patrimonial planning clients: concern about their Panamanian structures, uncertainty about whether to restructure, and questions about Panama’s future as a jurisdiction for family wealth protection.

The concern is reasonable. But the conclusion that “we need to leave Panama” or “the Private Interest Foundation no longer works” is, in most cases, premature and incorrect.

What Law 526 does require is an honest conversation between the client and their lawyer about what the structure actually does, what income it generates, and what patrimonial objectives it serves. That conversation — not panic — is the correct response.

The Panamanian Private Interest Foundation: what it is and why it’s used

The Private Interest Foundation (Fundación de Interés Privado, or FIP) is an instrument created by Law 25 of 1995, unique to Panamanian law. It is neither a corporation nor a trust, though it shares elements with both. It is an independent legal person, without shareholders, whose assets are dedicated to the purposes the founder establishes in its constitutive charter.

The reasons family office clients use the FIP go well beyond tax treatment:

Why the FIP is used
Asset protection: the foundation’s assets are separated from the founder’s personal assets and, in principle, from their creditors
Succession planning: allows the founder to define beneficiaries, conditions, and timing of asset distribution
Control: the founder can retain management powers without formal ownership of the assets
Privacy: does not require public disclosure of beneficiaries in most circumstances
Continuity: survives the founder’s death without the need for formal probate proceedings

These objectives — protection, succession, control, privacy, continuity — do not disappear with Law 526. What changes is the analysis of whether the FIP falls within the scope of the law, and whether that scope has tax consequences the client needs to understand.

The FIP and Law 526: three possible scenarios

How a FIP is treated under Law 526 depends on two factors: what is above it (who controls it?) and what is below it (what assets does it hold? does it own foreign entities?).

Scenario 1 · Likely Out of Scope

Natural person → Panamanian FIP → investment portfolios or foreign deposits (no foreign subsidiaries)

The FIP is a Panamanian entity. The founder is a natural person. There is no second entity in another jurisdiction controlling the FIP. If the foundation’s assets consist of direct financial investments — listed shares, bonds, bank accounts abroad — without the FIP owning foreign corporate entities, a multinational group probably does not exist.

In this scenario, Law 526 likely does not apply and the FIP retains its current position without needing to demonstrate economic substance.

Scenario 2 · Within Scope

Natural person → Panamanian FIP → shares in foreign companies → dividends and foreign income

If the FIP holds shares or equity stakes in foreign companies and receives dividends or other passive income from them, the FIP and those foreign entities configure a multinational group: two legal entities in different jurisdictions connected by ownership. Law 526 applies.

In this scenario, the lawyer must assess whether the FIP can demonstrate economic substance, or whether the structure’s architecture should be reconsidered — but that does not necessarily mean eliminating the FIP. It may mean adjusting which assets sit inside it.

Scenario 3 · Within Scope

Foreign trust → Panamanian FIP → assets and investments

When a foreign trust sits above the Panamanian FIP — a structure some international advisors recommend for privacy or cross-border succession planning purposes — the trust is a legal entity in another jurisdiction that controls the FIP. That configures a multinational group. Law 526 applies.

In this scenario, the analysis should consider whether the cost of the additional trust layer remains justified in the new tax environment, or whether the structure can be simplified.

What does not change: the patrimonial value of the FIP

Even in scenarios where Law 526 applies, the FIP does not lose its value as a patrimonial tool. What changes is the tax cost of certain income — not the utility of the structure for the purposes for which it was created.

If a FIP was established to protect family assets from potential creditors, ensure patrimonial continuity on the founder’s death, or establish a distribution order among beneficiaries across generations — those objectives remain valid. And the FIP remains one of the most effective instruments for achieving them within Panamanian law.

The decision to restructure, adjust, or maintain the FIP must be based on a complete analysis of the client’s objectives — not on an automatic reaction to the enactment of Law 526.

The questions the family office client should ask

The productive conversation with a patrimonial lawyer right now is not “does Law 526 affect me?” but a set of more precise questions:

The four questions of the patrimonial diagnostic
1What is inside the FIP? Direct financial assets or equity stakes in foreign companies? This determines the scenario.
2What is above the FIP? Is the founder the only natural person, or is there a trust or other entity above it?
3What foreign income does the FIP generate? Dividends from subsidiaries? Interest? Capital gains from a portfolio? The nature of the income determines the scope.
4What objectives does the FIP serve that cannot be achieved otherwise? Protection, succession, privacy, control. Those objectives weigh heavily in the restructuring decision.

With those four answers on the table, the lawyer can formulate an informed recommendation — not a generic one, but one specific to that client’s structure and objectives.

The time to act is now

The implementing regulations for Law 526 — expected before the end of August 2026 — will define specific application criteria. But the patrimonial diagnostic described above does not depend on those regulations. What is inside the FIP, what is above it, and what income it generates — that the client knows today, and a lawyer can analyze today.

The client who begins this conversation now has time to make decisions calmly. The one who waits until December 2026 will make the same decisions under pressure.

At EDTIJ

“We know our clients’ structures. That is why we can go straight to the right question: is this FIP within the scope of Law 526? And what do we do if it is?”

If you have a Private Interest Foundation or other patrimonial structure in Panama and want to understand its position under Law 526, we are available for the analysis.

mdellat@edtij.com  ·  +507-340-6324  ·  edtij.com

Author
Marisel Della Togna
Partner — EDTIJ · Escobar, Della Togna, Icaza & Jurado
mdellat@edtij.com
This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The specific analysis of each Private Interest Foundation requires an individualized review of its structure, assets, and patrimonial objectives. Conclusions are subject to the pending Executive regulations of Law 526, expected before the end of August 2026.

Law 526 on Economic Substance: What Multinational Groups Must Do Before Fiscal Year 2027

Law 526 on Economic Substance: What Multinational Groups Must Do Before Fiscal Year 2027 | EDTIJ
Tax Transparency & Economic Substance

Law 526 on Economic Substance: What Multinational Groups Must Do Before Fiscal Year 2027

EDTIJ — Escobar, Della Togna, Icaza & Jurado Panama · June 2026 Estimated reading: 6 min

The enactment of Law 526 on 28 May 2026 marked a turning point for corporate planning in Panama, yet the real challenge lies not in the wording of the statute but in the time remaining before it first applies. The law introduces economic substance requirements for entities that form part of multinational groups and earn foreign-source passive income, and it takes effect from fiscal year 2027.

Between now and then there is a preparation window that, used wisely, separates the groups that will arrive in compliance from those that will arrive improvising. Treating this reform as a mere tax update would be a misreading: at its core, it is a warning about how corporate structures are designed.

1. The actual scope of the rule

The first step is to understand the actual scope. Law 526 does not apply automatically to every Panamanian company or foundation. It reaches only entities that meet two conditions at once: belonging to a multinational group, understood as two or more entities linked by ownership or control and tax-resident in different jurisdictions, and earning foreign-source passive income such as dividends, interest, royalties, capital gains or real estate income. The first task for each group, therefore, is to determine precisely which entities fall within the perimeter of the rule and which do not.

The territorial system remains in force

Panama’s territorial tax system does not change. Law 526 reaches only a narrow category of cross-border cases; companies and foundations without an international link or without foreign-source passive income remain outside its scope.

2. The comparative experience: what other jurisdictions teach

In comparative terms, Panama is not breaking new ground: it follows the path that jurisdictions such as the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands traveled years ago when they adopted their own substance regimes in response to OECD and European Union requirements. The experience of those financial centers offers a clear lesson. Groups that treated substance as an exercise in architecture, with real staff, locally made decisions and actual expenditure, navigated the transition smoothly. Those that treated it as a documentary formality faced reclassifications, information requests and unexpected costs.

Panama now offers the chance to learn from that precedent rather than repeat its mistakes. Substance is not proven with a document; it is proven with a structure.

3. Advantages and disadvantages by type of structure

The assessment of advantages and disadvantages must be made case by case. For groups with genuine operations in Panama, the law is more an opportunity than a burden: demonstrating substance confirms the legitimacy of the structure and, by meeting the requirements, the entity continues without paying tax on that passive income. The disadvantage falls on purely instrumental structures, those without staff, facilities or real activity in the country, which, if not adjusted, would be exposed to a fifteen percent tax on the net taxable income derived from that passive income, with a limited credit for taxes paid abroad.

Type of entityApplicable testWhat must be demonstrated
Operating entityFull testAdequate staff and facilities, strategic decisions and risks assumed in Panama, local operating expenditure, plus reporting and supporting documentation.
Holding entity (equity interests or real estate)Reduced testAdequate resources and facilities plus the corresponding reporting. Relieved from demonstrating local strategic decisions and operating costs.
Entity without substanceNot applicable15% tax on the net taxable income from passive income, with a limited credit for taxes paid abroad.
On outsourcing

Outsourcing is permitted, but only where the work is actually performed in Panama. Functions carried out outside the country do not evidence substance, even when contracted through a provider within the same group.

4. The pending regulation is no reason to wait

Several operational aspects, including the forms, the precise deadlines and the evidentiary standards, will be defined in the regulation that the Executive must issue within ninety days of the law’s enactment. That pending regulation is no reason to wait. Building real substance takes time: hiring or relocating staff, formalizing where decisions are made, organizing expenditure and preparing supporting documentation are processes that cannot be improvised in the weeks before a filing.

5. How to make the right decision

The right decision depends on each group’s specific needs. There is no single answer. What does exist is a method: identify the entities within scope, classify the nature of their income, assess the current level of staff and facilities in Panama, anticipate the outcome of the applicable test, and document everything in advance.

Groups that begin this analysis now, rather than waiting for the regulation or the close of the period, will reach 2027 with certainty instead of exposure. In matters of economic substance, early preparation is not a formality: it is the difference between a solid structure and a contingency waiting to happen.

At EDTIJ we advise multinational groups, family holdings and investment vehicles on assessing their exposure to Law 526 and designing structures with real substance.

Consult with EDTIJ
#Law526 #EconomicSubstance #MultinationalGroups #InternationalTaxation #CorporateLaw #Panama #TaxPlanning #EDTIJ

Law 526: The Work Corporate Lawyers Must Do With Their Clients Now

Panama’s Law 526 of 2026 is now in force. For corporate lawyers, its enactment is not the end of a legislative process — it is the beginning of a concrete work agenda with every client holding Panamanian structures that generate foreign-source passive income. This article outlines the diagnostic that must begin now, the consequences of inaction, and the structural options available before January 2027.

Continue Reading

Panama’s Economic Substance Law: What Your Business Needs to Know

Tax Law  ·  May 29, 2026

Panama’s Economic Substance Law: What Your Business Needs to Know

A fundamental reform that changes the rules for multinational groups in Panama — and that is already in force.

On May 29, 2026, President José Raúl Mulino signed Law No. 526 — known as the Economic Substance Law — into effect. Published in Panama’s Official Gazette on the same date, the Law entered into force immediately, marking a turning point in Panama’s tax framework.

This Law does not come out of nowhere. It is Panama’s response to years of international pressure — particularly from the European Union — to align its territorial tax system with global standards of transparency and fair taxation. Costa Rica, Uruguay, Hong Kong, and Singapore have already walked this path. Now it is Panama’s turn.

What matters most for businesses and structures domiciled in the country is understanding what this reform means in practice, whether it applies to them, and what they should do — and when.

The context: why Panama enacted this Law

Panama operates a territorial tax system: only income generated within the country is taxed. Foreign-source income — dividends, interest, royalties, capital gains — has historically been exempt from tax for entities domiciled in Panama.

This regime, however, has been challenged by the European Union, which views it as a potentially harmful Foreign-Source Income Exemption (FSIE) system: it allows passive income generated abroad to go untaxed both where it is generated and where it is received. The result, technically speaking, is double non-taxation.

The Economic Substance Law is Panama’s chosen solution: rather than taxing all foreign income, it requires those who benefit from the exemption to demonstrate that they have a genuine economic presence in the country. A surgical approach that preserves territoriality without surrendering to double non-taxation.

What the Law establishes

Law No. 526 applies to entities belonging to multinational groups domiciled in Panama that receive certain passive income from foreign sources, including:

Covered passive income
— Dividends from foreign sources
— Interest from foreign sources
— Royalties (use of intellectual property)
— Capital gains
— Real estate capital income
— Other movable capital income

To retain the tax exemption on this income, the entity must demonstrate to Panama’s tax authority (DGI) that it has genuine economic substance in Panama, defined as the effective presence and use of:

Economic substance requirements
— Qualified and remunerated personnel based in Panama
— Adequate physical facilities within national territory
— Strategic decision-making and risk management from Panama
— Operating expenses related to income-generating assets

The Law expressly excludes entities engaged in the commercial operation of vessels registered under Panama’s special merchant marine legislation — a sector that already has an OECD-recognized substance regime.

The consequences of non-compliance

If an entity fails to demonstrate sufficient economic substance, it will be classified as “non-qualified.” The consequences are significant:

Its passive foreign-source income will be subject to a 15% rate on net taxable income — in addition to penalties, surcharges, and interest for failure to meet reporting obligations.

Furthermore, all entities within the scope of the Law must comply with new formal obligations regardless of whether they meet the substance requirements: an annual sworn economic substance declaration, an income tax return for foreign-source income, supporting documentation maintained in Panama, and audited financial statements.

The timeline: there is time, but not much

The Law has been in force since May 29, 2026. The Executive Branch has 90 days to issue the implementing regulations that will define filing deadlines, forms, and substance evaluation criteria — placing the regulatory framework around late August 2026.

Key dates
May 29, 2026Law No. 526 enters into force
~August 2026Implementing regulations (90 days from enactment)
October 2026EU list review — first opportunity for Panama’s removal
February 2027Second EU review, if needed

This means there is a genuine window to assess the situation, plan the necessary adjustments, and carry them out in an orderly manner — before the regulations activate the formal compliance deadlines. Acting now is not rushing: it is precisely what sound corporate governance recommends.

Does it apply to you?

The answer depends on each structure, and the determination is not always straightforward. Some general considerations:

The Law applies to entities that are part of a group operating in more than one jurisdiction and that receive passive income from abroad under Panama’s territorial exemption.

The Law does not apply to purely operational companies whose income derives from commercial or service activities within Panama, nor to entities under the maritime regime, which are expressly excluded.

There are grey areas — patrimonial structures, private interest foundations, regional holding companies — whose classification under the Law requires individual analysis. And that analysis is worth carrying out sooner rather than later.

At EDTIJ

“We know our clients’ structures. That is why we can go straight to the point: determine whether the Law applies, to what extent, and what specific actions are needed.”

If you have questions about how this legislation affects you, we are available to guide you. This is exactly the kind of analysis we do — and the time to do it is now, while the window is still open.

Author
Marisel Della Togna
EDTIJ — Estudios de Derecho e Inversiones Jurídicas
mdellat@edtij.com
This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Assessing the specific impact on your structure requires individual review.

Economic Substance in Panama: What Bill 641 Means for Your Company

Tax & Corporate Law · Panama

Economic Substance in Panama: What Bill 641 Means for Your Company

By EDTIJ May 2026 Legislative Update
On May 21, Panama’s National Assembly Committee on Economy and Finance approved Bill 641 on first debate. The bill establishes an economic substance regime for passive income of foreign source earned by entities domiciled in Panama. The full Assembly has until June 5 to pass it into law.

If enacted, the regime takes effect in fiscal year 2027, with 90 days for the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) to issue implementing regulations. For companies with Panamanian structures generating income abroad, this is not an abstract legislative development. It is a decision that must be made before the year is out.

What Does Bill 641 Establish?

The law applies to entities that are part of multinational groups domiciled in Panama and that receive passive income of foreign source. The scope covers:

  • Dividends from foreign subsidiaries
  • Interest on loans extended outside Panama
  • Royalties of foreign origin
  • Capital gains on foreign assets
  • Income from real estate located outside Panama

The bill creates two categories with radically different tax consequences:

The two categories of the regime
Category A
Qualifying Entity
Demonstrates real economic substance in Panama. Retains the existing territorial exemption.
0%
Category B
Non-Qualifying Entity
Fails to demonstrate sufficient substance. Taxed on net foreign-source passive income.
15%

The shift from gross to net income as the taxable base for the 15% rate was a significant amendment introduced during the first debate. It represents a meaningful technical improvement for companies with a substantial cost structure.

What Does Demonstrating Economic Substance Require?

The law requires each entity to demonstrate, with respect to every passive income-generating asset, compliance with four requirements:

  • 1Qualified, remunerated personnel in Panama — staff with effective functions over the activity generating the income.
  • 2Adequate physical facilities in Panama — real physical presence proportionate to the scale of operations.
  • 3Strategic and control decisions made from Panama — boards of directors and decision-making bodies must deliberate and resolve within the country.
  • 4Operating expenses proportionate to the activity — the cost structure must be consistent with the volume and nature of declared income.
Exception for pure holding entities: Entities that solely hold equity interests in other companies or real estate without conducting direct commercial activity are only required to satisfy the first requirement: having qualified personnel in Panama. This exception may be determinative in any restructuring analysis.

Who Needs to Act Urgently?

Bill 641 is relevant to any company or structure that simultaneously meets these three conditions:

  • Is incorporated or domiciled in Panama
  • Forms part of a group with presence in more than one jurisdiction
  • Receives dividends, interest, royalties, or other passive income generated outside Panama
The treatment of private interest foundations and patrimonial trusts receiving foreign-source passive income remains subject to regulatory interpretation that the MEF must clarify during the 90-day rulemaking period. These structures require individualized analysis.

What Should Your Company Do Now?

Companies exposed to this regime have three courses of action, each with distinct implications for timing, cost, and structure:

I
Build genuine substance
Establish real presence in Panama to preserve the 0% territorial exemption. Requires operational and human resources planning.
II
Accept the rate
Assess whether 15% on net income is fiscally acceptable given the volume of passive income and existing cost structure.
III
Restructure operations
Relocate activities or structures to jurisdictions where genuine presence and verifiable substance already exist.

Key Dates

June 5, 2026
Final vote in the National Assembly. The bill could become binding law within days.
90 days post-enactment
MEF implementing regulations. This period will define the specific criteria for “sufficient substance” with immediate practical effect.
October 2026
FATF/EU evaluation — potential removal from the grey list. Bill 641 is part of the compliance package Panama is presenting to international bodies.
January 2027
New economic substance regime enters into force for entities domiciled in Panama.

The Time to Review Is Now

The regulations the MEF must issue within 90 days of enactment will set the specific criteria for what constitutes “sufficient substance” in practice. That said, the structural elements of the regime are already clear enough to begin the analysis.

Companies that initiate their review before those regulations are issued will be better positioned to make informed decisions and implement necessary adjustments within the timelines the law itself imposes.

At EDTIJ, we advise clients on the analysis of their corporate and asset structures in light of Bill 641’s new requirements.
If your company operates in Panama or through a Panamanian structure with foreign-source passive income, the analysis cannot wait for the regulations.

Family Offices in Panama: Legal, Tax and Wealth Structuring

Family Offices in Panama: Legal, Tax and Wealth Structuring | EDTIJ

Family Offices in Panama: Legal, Tax and Wealth Structuring

Family Office Panama - EDTIJ

Professional family wealth management is no longer the exclusive domain of global fortunes. Across Latin America, the growth of second- and third-generation business groups — combined with the increasing complexity of family assets, from international investments and cross-border real estate to corporate holdings — has generated rising demand for family office structures built with legal and fiscal rigor. Panama, with its well-developed legal architecture, territorial tax principle, and robust wealth planning instruments, holds a strategic position in this conversation.

1. What Is a Family Office — and What Is It Not?

The term family office is frequently used imprecisely, generating confusion among clients and advisors alike. In its technical sense, a family office is a structure — or set of structures — created to centrally manage the comprehensive wealth of one or more families: financial investments, real estate assets, corporate holdings, insurance, succession planning, and in many cases, organized philanthropy.

Single Family Office (SFO)

Serves a single family. It offers maximum control, confidentiality, and customization, but requires a meaningful level of assets under management for operational costs to be proportionate. As a general benchmark, an SFO is considered viable from approximately ten million dollars in assets under management, though this threshold varies depending on asset complexity and the jurisdictions involved.

Multi-Family Office (MFO)

Shares infrastructure and costs among several unrelated families. It involves certain trade-offs in exclusivity and confidentiality but democratizes access to sophisticated wealth management services. From a regulatory standpoint, it may require financial services or investment advisory licenses depending on the jurisdiction.

Hybrid Structures

In practice, many Latin American families operate with configurations combining elements of both models: a holding entity consolidating business interests, one or more private interest foundations for long-term assets, and delegated management agreements with third parties for financial investments.

A family office is not a holding company. A holding consolidates ownership and facilitates corporate management, but lacks — on its own — the governance layer, succession planning, and active investment management that define a family office. The distinction is not formal: it is functional.

Confusing both concepts is one of the most common errors in the Latin American market. Incorporating a Panamanian corporation to hold family assets is not — even remotely — the same as establishing a family office. The latter requires a deliberate architecture responding to specific patrimonial, tax, and succession objectives.

2. Legal Frameworks Available in Panama

Panama offers a set of legal instruments that, used strategically and in combination, allow for the construction of robust, flexible, and tax-efficient family office structures. There is no single correct vehicle: selection depends on the family’s objectives, the nature of the assets, and the jurisdictions where income flows originate.

InstrumentMain AdvantageTypical Use in Family OfficeKey Consideration
Private Interest FoundationAsset separation, continuity, confidentialityLong-term assets, succession planning, legaciesNot a legal entity in the traditional sense; requires a well-drafted internal regulation
Patrimonial Corporation (S.A.)Corporate flexibility, ease of share transferAsset holding, corporate interest ownershipDoes not provide asset protection on its own; must be complemented by shareholder agreements and documented governance
TrustFiduciary asset transfer, management by qualified trusteeInvestment portfolio management, family reserve funds, successionRequires licensed trustee; trustee obligations must be contractually defined
PIF + Corporation CombinationOptimizes asset separation and operational efficiencyFoundation as beneficiary of the corporation; corporation manages active assetsRequires coherence among bylaws, regulations, and contracts to avoid ownership conflicts

Private Interest Foundation (PIF)

Governed by Law 25 of 1995, the private interest foundation is the most emblematic instrument of Panamanian wealth planning. Unlike a trust, the PIF does not transfer assets to a trustee: it holds them within an autonomous estate managed by a foundation council. This distinction is relevant in contexts where the founder wishes to maintain a degree of indirect control over the assets.

In a family office structure, the PIF is typically used as a long-term vehicle: recipient of dividends from operating holdings, holder of real estate with sentimental or strategic value, and executor of the succession distribution plan. Its internal regulation can incorporate family governance clauses — conditions for receiving distributions, conflict resolution mechanisms, rules for incorporating new generations — that no corporation can replicate with the same flexibility.

Patrimonial Corporation

The Panamanian corporation (S.A.) is the operational vehicle of choice. In family office structures, it is typically used as a holding layer: consolidating interests in operating businesses, maintaining investment accounts, and facilitating asset transfers through share assignments. Its utility increases when combined with a shareholder agreement regulating the exercise of voting and economic rights among family members.

Trust

The Panamanian trust, governed by Law 1 of 1984, involves the effective transfer of assets to a trustee who manages them for the benefit of the beneficiary. It is particularly useful when the family requires professional management of investment portfolios or when the founder desires a more definitive asset separation. In family office structures, the trust can coexist with the PIF: the latter acts as beneficiary of the former, optimizing both active management and asset protection.

The private interest foundation combined with a corporation is, in most cases, the strongest starting point for a Panamanian family office. But the optimal structure does not exist in the abstract: it exists in relation to the specific assets, families, and time horizons of each client.

3. Key Tax Considerations

The tax analysis of a Panamanian family office must begin with a foundational principle of Panama’s tax system: territoriality. Panama taxes only income of Panamanian source, meaning income generated by assets or activities abroad is not subject to local income tax. This principle is, in many cases, the primary reason Latin American families choose Panama as the seat of their wealth structures.

Territorial Taxation

Territoriality is neither absolute nor automatic. Its correct application depends on the wealth structure being designed with coherence: decisions must be made where they are said to be made, records must reflect operational reality, and documentation must support the qualification of income as foreign-source. A structure that invokes territoriality without genuine substance behind it faces significant risk, particularly in the context of automatic information exchange under the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) and Panama’s OECD commitments.

Dividend Treatment

Dividends paid by Panamanian companies to their shareholders are subject to withholding at source. The rate varies depending on the origin of profits: profits derived from foreign-source income receive differential treatment compared to profits of Panamanian source. This distinction must be documented in the accounting records from the outset of the structure’s operations; it cannot easily be reconstructed retroactively.

Foreign-Source Income in the PIF

Private interest foundations that receive income exclusively from foreign sources are not subject to Panamanian income tax, provided they do not engage in commercial activities within the territory. However, the DGI (Panama’s tax authority) has intensified its scrutiny of structures that mix domestic and foreign-source income without clear accounting separation. Documenting the origin of each income flow is therefore a practical obligation rather than a merely formal one.

Reporting Obligations Before the DGI

Family office structures in Panama are subject to multiple reporting obligations that have increased significantly in recent years as a result of the country’s international transparency commitments. These include: beneficial owner registration (Law 52 of 2016 and its amendments), asset declarations for legal entities, and CRS obligations for financial or quasi-financial entities. Non-compliance not only generates administrative penalties but can compromise the structure’s reputation before correspondent banks and international counterparties.

Territoriality does not equal opacity. Families that structure a family office in Panama expecting their assets to be invisible to the tax authorities of their countries of fiscal residence are operating on an outdated and dangerous premise. Modern structure design starts from compliance, not evasion.

4. Common Mistakes in Panamanian Family Offices

Experience advising family wealth structures reveals patterns of error that repeat with remarkable regularity. Identifying them early — ideally before the structure is established — can save significant legal, tax, and relational costs.

Mistake 01

Confusing legal ownership with effective control. In many structures, the client retains full operational control over the assets — signing contracts, instructing the bank, making investment decisions — while formal ownership rests with a PIF or corporation. This dissociation, if not carefully documented and justified, can be disregarded by tax or judicial authorities in the jurisdictions where the beneficiaries reside. Undocumented effective control dismantles the asset separation the structure aims to create.

Mistake 02

Mixing personal and corporate assets. Using the patrimonial company’s account for personal expenses, or transferring personal assets into the structure without documentation, creates asset commingling that can compromise both the protection the structure provides and the tax qualification of income. Entities within a family office must operate independently and maintain their own accounting records, even when ultimate control rests with the same family.

Mistake 03

Failing to document family governance. A family office without a family protocol — or with one that exists on paper but is never applied — is a structure waiting for a conflict. Agreements on decision-making, income distribution, incorporation of new generations, and exit mechanisms must be formalized, periodically reviewed, and known to all family members involved. Governance is not bureaucracy: it is the insurance against the dissolution of wealth through internal conflict.

Mistake 04

Ignoring changes in the international regulatory environment. Structures designed ten years ago under assumptions of absolute privacy and low regulatory pressure require review. Automatic information exchange, beneficial owner registries, and anti-abuse rules in the countries where beneficiaries reside have transformed the landscape. A robust family office is reviewed regularly; it is not established once and forgotten.

Conclusion: A Family Office Is Not Incorporated — It Is Designed

The strength of a family office structure does not depend on the instrument chosen, but on the quality of the analysis that precedes it. The question is not “what entity should I create?” but rather “what does this family need to achieve over the next ten, twenty, or thirty years, and what structure can sustain those objectives with legal, fiscal, and relational coherence?”

Panama offers a genuinely sophisticated legal arsenal for family wealth planning. But that arsenal only works when operated by advisors who understand both the local legal architecture and the international regulatory environment in which clients and their assets operate.

Incorporating vehicles without prior strategic design is not wealth planning: it is generating complexity without purpose. And complexity without purpose does not protect patrimony — it fragments it.

Are you considering structuring a family office or reviewing an existing wealth structure? Our team can guide you through the initial analysis, instrument selection, and family governance design.

Contact EDTIJ
#FamilyOffice #FamilyWealth #EDTIJ #Panama #LegalStructuring #WealthPlanning #CorporateLaw

Periodic Review of Tax Regimes in Panama: When a Structure Stops Making Sense

In Panama, tax regimes should not be viewed only through the lens of incentives. They are also about structure, operational consistency, and defendability. Panama remains attractive because its income tax system is built on territoriality, meaning that income produced within Panama is taxed, while certain international activities may still fall outside the Panamanian tax base. On top of that, the country offers special platforms such as Panama Pacifico, SEM, and EMMA, each designed to attract investment, employment, regional services, and high-value business activity. For many groups, that combination still makes Panama highly competitive.

The real issue, however, is not whether a company entered a regime correctly. The real issue is whether anyone revisited that decision after the business changed. Operations evolve. Decision-making shifts. Contracts are renegotiated. Functions migrate. Risk allocation changes. Over time, the legal vehicle that once made perfect sense may begin to describe a business that no longer exists in the same way. At that point, a regime may still work on paper and yet cease to be the smartest structure in practice.

For comparative purposes, one of Panama’s clearest regional reference points is Costa Rica. Panama offers a blend of territorial taxation and sector-specific regimes. Costa Rica, by contrast, promotes a more standardized free zone model, with incentives expressly framed by law, defined corporate income tax relief periods, and a stronger compliance narrative tied to OECD and WTO standards. Panama’s advantage is flexibility. Costa Rica’s advantage is standardization and a more visible link between tax benefits and operating footprint. That distinction matters, because flexibility can be powerful, but it can also allow outdated structures to remain in place longer than they should.

That is why a periodic review of tax regimes should not be treated as a back-office exercise. It should be treated as a governance and risk-management discipline. A serious review should ask whether the license still matches the real activity, whether billing still reflects the current business model, whether local substance is still proportionate to the benefit being claimed, whether related-party flows remain defensible, and whether the structure can still be explained clearly to banks, auditors, regulators, counterparties, and internal stakeholders. The right question is no longer simply whether a company may remain under a regime. The better question is whether it still should.

This becomes especially clear under SEM and EMMA. In the SEM regime, the framework requires an annual sworn report within six months after fiscal year-end and contemplates sanctions for non-compliance. The regime is also built around the idea that the licensed entity provides approved services to its corporate group. Under EMMA, the reduced income tax rate comes with real substance requirements in Panama, including qualified full-time employees and adequate operating expenditures, as well as transfer pricing obligations. The official guidance also makes clear that the benefits belong to the license holder itself, not to outside service providers. These are precisely the details that make periodic review a legal necessity rather than an administrative preference.

Panama Pacifico should be read in the same way. Its appeal lies not only in tax relief, but also in legal stability, streamlined procedures, and labor, immigration, and administrative flexibility. Yet those advantages lose value when the company is no longer organized in a way that properly fits the regime, or when the business has expanded into activities, markets, or value chains that no longer align cleanly with the original platform. In that scenario, stability does not replace review; it makes review more urgent.

There is also a reputational angle that cannot be ignored in 2026. Panama remains on the European Union’s list of non-cooperative jurisdictions, as updated on 17 February 2026. Whatever one’s policy view of that list may be, its practical effect is to intensify scrutiny around structures connected to Panama. That means a periodic review is no longer only about tax savings or operational efficiency. It is also about corporate narrative, banking relationships, broader compliance expectations, and reputational resilience. In today’s environment, the right structure is not just the one that generates benefits. It is the one that withstands scrutiny without losing coherence.

At EDTIJ, the point is not to discourage the use of tax regimes or international planning. That would miss the mark. Panama still offers valuable legal tools that can be used legitimately and effectively. The real point is that structures should be reviewed with the same discipline applied to an investment, an expansion, or a corporate reorganization. A structure may remain legal and yet stop being intelligent. It may continue producing savings and still create more exposure than it deserves. It may remain alive in the documentation while its business logic has already expired.

The best answer is not always to exit a regime. Sometimes the correct move is to refine licenses, separate functions, strengthen substance, correct documentation, revisit intercompany agreements, or redesign the broader corporate architecture. But none of that can happen without review. And in tax and corporate matters, timely review almost always costs less than late defense.

Panama #TaxRegimes #CorporateLaw #InternationalTax #EconomicSubstance #CorporateGovernance #Compliance #SEM #EMMA #PanamaPacifico

Tax Incentives in Panama: When an Advantage Becomes a Liability

Panama maintains one of the most competitive tax incentive frameworks in Latin America. Its special regimes — SEM, EMMA, Panama-Pacific, and Free Zones — were designed to attract investment, promote skilled employment, and position the country as a regional business hub. For companies that use them correctly, they represent a meaningful operational and financial advantage.

The problem is not the incentives themselves. It is how they are applied.

A significant number of companies operating under special regimes do so without rigorously and periodically verifying whether their operational structure meets the conditions the regime actually requires. The result is not simply the loss of a tax benefit — it is the creation of a tax contingency that can escalate rapidly in both financial and reputational terms.

What the tax authority actually evaluates

Panama’s Directorate General of Revenue does not merely verify that a company is registered under a special regime. When an audit occurs — and audits in Panama have increased in recent years, driven in part by the country’s commitments to the OECD and FATF — what is examined is the operational reality of the company, not its documentary appearance.

Under the SEM regime, for example, the criteria evaluated include the existence of full-time qualified personnel dedicated to authorized activities, the level of real operating expenses incurred in Panama, and evidence that strategic decisions for the corporate group are made from Panamanian territory. Equivalent requirements apply to Panama-Pacific and EMMA, with specific variations depending on the activity involved.

A company that maintains an active license but operates without meeting these conditions is not in a gray area. It is carrying a concrete and documentable risk.

The most common consequences

When the tax authority determines that a company does not meet the conditions of the regime under which it operates, the most typical consequences are as follows.

The first is the retroactive loss of the tax benefit. This means the reduced rate or exemption the company had been applying is reclassified, and the taxes that should have been paid — with interest and surcharges — become a tax liability that may span several fiscal years.

The second is the imposition of fines. Depending on the severity of the non-compliance and the period involved, penalties can easily exceed one hundred thousand dollars.

The third, and often underestimated, consequence is reporting to foreign authorities. Panama participates in automatic tax information exchange mechanisms. A local audit with significant findings can trigger notifications to jurisdictions where the corporate group operates, with consequences that extend well beyond Panama.

A recurring pattern

The most common pattern we observe in practice is the following: a company obtains a license under a special regime, properly structured at the time of incorporation. Over time, its operations evolve. Activities expand or change, personnel turns over, contracts are renewed. No one revisits whether the current structure still meets the original conditions of the regime.

That gap between operational reality and regime requirements can accumulate for years before an audit brings it to light. By that point, the cost of resolving the problem is exponentially greater than the cost of preventing it.

The role of legal counsel in preventive management

Managing the regulatory risk associated with tax incentives is not a task that can be delegated exclusively to the company’s accounting or administrative team. It requires periodic legal review to assess whether the operational structure remains consistent with the regime’s terms, whether supporting documentation is sufficient for an audit scenario, and whether regulatory changes — including the Economic Substance Bill currently under discussion in Panama’s National Assembly — affect existing obligations.

EDTIJ assists companies operating under special regimes with the review, structuring, and updating of their fiscal compliance frameworks. If your company holds a SEM, Panama-Pacific, EMMA, or Free Zone license and has not conducted a compliance review in the past twelve months, now is the time to do so.

Contact us at www.edtij.com