The SCJN Postpones the Review of the Tax on Delivery Drivers by Application
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) has decided to postpone the analysis of a fundamental recourse for protection that challenges the implementation of a 2% tax applied to the income of delivery people who work for digital platforms. This tribute, promoted by the Morena bench in Mexico City, has generated intense legal and social controversy, culminating in a workers’ demonstration in front of the High Court this Thursday.
During the session, the president of the Court, Hugo Aguilar Ortiz, formally requested the minister rapporteur Lenia Batres Guadarrama to postpone the presentation of his draft sentence. This document is anticipated to propose validating the collection of tax from drivers and delivery people for the use of urban infrastructure. Aguilar Ortiz’s request was based on the commitment of the new integration of the Court to promote dialogue with all the parties involved before issuing a final resolution.
“I want to ask Minister Lenia Batres Guadarrama, who is the rapporteur on all these matters, if she allows us to put it on the list or postpone it in order to listen to the parties, that this new Court has offered to have dialogue and listen to all interested parties before making a decision,” declared the presiding judge. Minister Batres Guadarrama agreed to the request, so the debate and potential resolution on this thorny issue remained on hold.
Legal Background and an Canceled Project
The path of this litigation has been complex. Before its extinction as a chamber, the extinct Second Chamber of the Court had rejected a draft sentence prepared by the then minister Alberto Pérez Dayán. Said draft, now without effect, proposed confirming the protection filed by the company Uber Portier México, which would have annulled the collection of the tax. With the disappearance of that room and the invalidation of that project, the controversy was reassigned to Minister Batres Guadarrama, who has prepared a new opinion that, according to indications, is inclined to confirm the legality of the charge to the delivery people.
This shift in potential judicial stance reflects the changing nature of legal interpretation regarding digital taxation and regulation of the collaborative economy. The situation leaves thousands of workers on platforms such as Uber, Didi and Rappi in a state of legal and financial uncertainty, waiting for a ruling that will directly impact their income.
The Voice of the Affected: Protest and Discontent
Parallel to the judicial proceedings, a concentration of deliverers by application took place outside the headquarters of the SCJN. The protesters expressed their strong rejection of the tax, arguing that it represents an unfair burden on their profits, especially considering the precarious conditions of the road infrastructure they must use daily.
The workers’ position was captured in the words of Manuel Gaytán, a delivery driver who during the protest declared: “If they approve this 2% for an infrastructure that is bad, an infrastructure that is killing us with its open drains, with its potholes, they are going to hit us harder. If they approve this tax, they are going to take away 15% of our sweat.” This statement highlights the main complaint: the perception that they are required to pay for the use of public infrastructure that is in poor condition, which adds additional risk to their already demanding work.
The analysis of this case transcends the mere tax debate. It is situated at the intersection between state regulation, new digital business models and the labor and economic rights of self-employed workers. The Court’s final decision will set a crucial precedent for how the Mexican legal system addresses taxation in the so-called gig economy or platforms. A ruling in favor of the tax could open the door to similar taxes in other states, while a resolution against it would reinforce the protection of the income of this growing sector of the economically active population. The position of Minister Batres, and eventually of the majority of the Court, will be a thermometer of the institutional vision on distributive justice in the digital age.
The delay in resolution, although it generates uncertainty, can also be interpreted as an opportunity for a deeper analysis and a constructive dialogue that considers all the aspects of this complex socioeconomic phenomenon. The world watches as Mexico resolves this dilemma between the need for public financing and the protection of the most vulnerable actors in the digital value chain.
Does this topic seem relevant to the digital economy? Share this analysis on your social networks and help us foster the conversation about the future of work and taxation. Explore more content related to technology regulation on our site.
