Packaging manufacturers must prove reuse through admissible evidence

The management of the Special Tax on non-reusable plastic packaging poses operational challenges for companies seeking a refund of this tax. The nature of the packaging and the documentation required to justify its status as reusable has been the subject of analysis by the tax authority.

What the DGT has ruled

The Directorate General of Taxes (DGT) has clarified that the reusable status of packaging is not determined by the user's intent, but by its objective configuration. Regarding the accreditation of this fact to request a tax refund, the Administration has indicated that taxpayers may use any means of evidence that is admissible under law.

However, the authority emphasizes that the tax enforcement bodies have the power to assess whether such means of evidence are valid and sufficient to prove the reality of the reuse. This includes the possibility of providing certificates of recycled plastic material content under specific standards, such as UNE-EN 15343:2008, without this necessarily implying the exclusion of other documents.

What it means for you

For plastic packaging manufacturers, this criterion implies that the burden of proof lies with the company. It is not enough to declare reuse or recycled content; it is necessary to present documentation that the Administration considers solid. The relevance of this point lies in the fact that the sufficiency of the certificates presented is not guaranteed in advance, as it is subject to the criteria of the inspectors or agents of the Tax Administration.

What should be done

When considering a request for a tax refund, companies must ensure that the documentation provided is exhaustive. It is fundamental to have means of evidence that demonstrate the objective configuration of the packaging as reusable. It is recommended to evaluate the robustness of technical certificates and the traceability of the plastic material to minimize uncertainty in the assessment made by the Administration regarding the sufficiency of the evidence presented.