Background and Relevance of the Individual Mentioned
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) ruling declaring the 2% tax on delivery platforms in Mexico City unconstitutional is a relief for the digital ecosystem. As local governments seek new revenue sources, labor regulations advance with definitions that could strangle the model they aim to protect. The SCJN’s decision upholds the principle of tax legality, but labor reform in digital platforms (with a social security pilot starting July 1, 2025) poses greater risks to the industry’s sustainability.
SCJN’s Ruling on the 2% Tax
The SCJN declared unconstitutional the 2% charge outlined in Article 307 Ter of the CDMX Fiscal Code, which was to be collected by delivery platforms. The charge was disguised as “enjoyment” for using streets and highways, but the Second Collegiate Tribunal concluded that it meets all elements of a tax and that legislating on electronic commerce is the exclusive domain of the federal Congress, not local governments. The decision safeguards platforms from arbitrary contributions.
Implications of the Ruling
While the SCJN’s ruling is a victory for delivery workers and app users, it does not resolve regulatory pressure on platforms. Each legal dispute incurs costs for companies, generating uncertainty that eventually affects users and workers through higher fees or fewer job opportunities.
Labor Reform and Its Challenges
Starting July 1, 2025, the IMSS and Infonavit’s mandatory registration program for digital platform workers will take effect, according to Article 291-K fractions V and VI of the Federal Labor Law and labor reform for digital platforms.
- Definition of Net Income: The core issue lies in defining net income. If a casual delivery remains independent or becomes subordinate with all employer charges depends on this definition. Precise calibration of net income (the amount left after deducting taxes, operational costs, and other expenses from gross income) is crucial to avoid discouraging the flexibility that characterizes collaborative economy.
- Risks of the Reform:
- Increased Operational Costs and Fees: Platforms must absorb IMSS and Infonavit contributions from the first peso exceeding the threshold. This cost could be passed on to users, raising delivery prices.
- Exit from Low-Demand Markets: Cities with fewer orders may become unprofitable, causing platforms to withdraw and resulting in lost job opportunities and income for local delivery workers, including young students and women.
- Impact on Flexible Workers: According to the SAT, 658,000 people work on digital platforms, but only 272,000 surpass the monthly minimum wage threshold. It’s essential to prevent those using platforms less regularly from being excluded from this employment and income model.
- Bureaucratic Burden: Issuing weekly receipts, measuring discontinuous work hours and flows, and managing multiple digital contracts add costs and bureaucracy that undermine the agility of platforms, whose main advantage is reducing transaction costs for users.
- IMSS’s Uncalculated Costs: The IMSS has not assessed the economic, hospital care, and medication costs of securing social security for new platform workers (658,000) in an already saturated, low-quality, and inefficient healthcare system that fails to meet population demands and expectations.
- Discrimination in Labor Market: The labor reform does not extend social security to other independent workers (taxi drivers, gasoline dispatchers), creating market distortions and labor discrimination.
A More Just Alternative
The most equitable solution is to design a universal social security system, detached from labor subordination, where platform workers contribute to a health and retirement fund through individual accounts while maintaining their flexibility. This approach ensures protection without compromising innovation, autonomy, and the flexibility that attracts those choosing collaborative economy as an income source.
Conclusion
The SCJN’s decision on the 2% tax and the IMSS and Infonavit’s mandatory registration highlight the challenge of regulating a dynamic sector combining technology, work, and mobility. Eliminating arbitrary local contributions is insufficient; respecting the concept of net income and rethinking social security schemes that protect workers without harming platform flexibility and viability is crucial. This approach will pave the way for a legal framework promoting digital economy, ensuring labor rights, and fostering sustainable business models in Mexico.
