Secretary of the Presidency, Alejandro Sánchez, has come forward to staunchly defend the new National Budget Bill, with particular emphasis on the tax package proposed by the Executive Branch. But his words have resonated strongly in a society that closely monitors every official move on fiscal matters.
Before the political debate heats up, it's essential to understand the elements at stake. The government's original text is the foundation, but keywords—such as "tax," "VAT," "Temu," "budget," and their variants—will guide the approach. Internal URLs, knowledge of the Uruguayan public, and the local context are key to ensuring the information is tailored to our reality.
Sánchez's darts and the reality that is not seen
Sánchez defends the tax changes , especially the controversial "Temu tax," with an argument that seeks empathy: "I'm on the side of the hardware store owner in my neighborhood, who is Uruguayan like everyone else. While the intention is to defend local businesses, the phrase "are we going to buy crappy stuff from someone we don't know, or would we prefer to buy from a store that offers a certain level of fairness?" has generated intense debate.
The underlying criticism is that the government is demonizing a popular consumer option, ignoring the reality of many Uruguayans who, for economic reasons, seek more affordable alternatives. The term "berretas" (poor quality) not only discredits the product but also underestimates the intelligence and judgment of those who choose to buy on international platforms. The debate isn't about "neighborhood stores versus Temu," but about access to affordable goods in a context of inflation and a precarious economy for many households.
The minimum tax and fiscal sovereignty
The government has officially announced the decision to modify purchases on foreign platforms. The deductible limit has been increased from US$600 to US$800, but the new feature is the 22% VAT levy. Sánchez justifies this measure with a rhetorical question: "Why wouldn't I charge Temu?" Along the same lines, he defends the Minimum Domestic Complementary Tax (IMCD) for multinationals, asking: "If they pay taxes abroad, isn't it reasonable for those taxes to be paid and contribute to financing resources?"
The government argues that these taxes are an act of "tax justice" and that the new international tax situation neutralizes the tax benefits Uruguay once offered. The question is whether, in practice, these changes actually benefit ordinary citizens or whether they simply shift the tax burden from one place to another, without generating a significant impact on the population's well-being. The discussion about the "fairness" of these taxes is just beginning , and time will tell whether Uruguayans will see their fruits.