AUDIT OF THE TAXPAYER’S FINANCIAL SITUATION REPORT (Free translation from Spanish
to English)
To the Mexichem, S.A.B. DE C.V. Board of Directors and Shareholders,
To the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit,
To the Tax Administration Service (SAT), and
To the General Large Taxpayer Administration
1.
I issue this report on my audit, conducted under the International Standards on Auditing (ISA), of the
financial statements prepared by Mexichem, S.A.B. de C.V. in accordance with Article 32-A of the Federal
Tax Code (CFF, acronym in Spanish), Article 58, Sections I, IV and V of the CFF Regulations (RCFF,
acronym in Spanish), Rules 2.13.7, 2.19.5 the 2016 Omnibus Tax Bill (RMF, acronym in Spanish), and with
the consolidation instructions and features and the forms and guidelines used to express an opinion on
financial statements for tax purposes contained in Annex 16-a of the RMF as published in the Federal Official
Gazette (DOF, acronym in Spanish) on May 23, 2016.
On July 28, 2016, I issued a clean audit report based on my audit.
2.
Exclusively per the terms outlined in this section, I hereby state the following under affirmation,
based on the provisions outlined in Articles 52 paragraph III of the CFF; Articles 57 and 58, Section III of the
RCFF, and Rule 2.19.6 of the 2016 Omnibus Tax Bill:
A.
Concerning the audit of the Mexichem, S.A.B. DE C.V. (the “Entity’s”) financial statements
conducted in conformity with IAS for the year ended December 31, 2015, and based on the terms established
in the preceding paragraphs, I issued a clean audit report that does not affect the taxpayer’s status.
B.
As part of my audit described in the preceding paragraphs, I reviewed the other information and
documentation prepared by the Entity and under its own responsibility, in accordance with Article 32-A of the
CFF; Article 58, Sections I, IV, and V of the RCFF; Rules 2.13.7, 2.19.5 of the 2016 Omnibus Tax Bill, and
the consolidation instructions and features and the forms and guidelines used to express an opinion on
financial statements for tax purposes contained in Annex 16-A of the RMF, filed with the 2015 tax opinion
submitted through the SAT’s online system, SIPRED. I audited this information and documentation with the
selective testing methodology, using the audit procedures applicable to the circumstances within the scope
required to express my opinion on the financial statements taken as a whole, in conformity with the ISA. This
information is included exclusively for use and analysis by the General Large Taxpayer Administration. I
hereby express the following based on my audit:
I.
Within the selective testing carried out in compliance with the ISA, I reviewed the fiscal situation of
the taxpayer referred to in Article 58, Section V of RCFF, Rules 2.19.9, 2.19.10, and Section XVI of Rule
2.19.6 of the RMF, for the period covering the audited financial statements and, within the scope of my
selective testing, I reasonably confirmed that the goods and services acquired or disposed of or granted in use
or enjoyment by the Entity were effectively received, delivered or rendered, respectively. Under Section II of
Rule 2.19.6 of the RMF, the procedures applied did not include the examination of compliance with customs
and foreign trade matters.
My working papers include evidence of the audit procedures applied to items selected with the sampling
method and supporting the conclusions.
II.
I confirmed, on a selective testing basis and according to the ISA, the calculation and federal tax
payments for the year included in the list of contributions charged to the taxpayer as a direct subject or in its
position as a tax withholder.
Because the entity does not have employees, it does not determine employer contributions payable to the
Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) derived from wages and salaries.
III.
I confirmed through the selective testing method and the ISA, that the taxpayer is entitled to the
credit balances requested in the returns or applied to the compensation carried out during the year under
review, and that the outstanding refund amounts or those refunded to the entity by the tax authority are
derived from this balance.
IV.
Based on the nature and application mechanics utilized in previous years, as appropriate, I checked
the items and amounts shown in the following annexes:

Reconciliation between the accounting and tax results for income tax (ISR) purposes, and

Reconciliation between the income audited according to the comprehensive income statement; the
cumulative amount for income tax purposes, as well as the sum of all acts or activities for purposes of the
final Value Added Tax (VAT), paid on a monthly basis in 2015.
V.
I checked the supplementary tax returns that I had knowledge of, and that were filed to cover the tax
differences determined during the year, and confirmed that they were filed under the established tax
provisions. I also reviewed the supplementary tax returns I had knowledge of that were filed by the taxpayer
in the year object of the audit, which modified the prior years’ tax returns, confirming that they were filed
under the established tax provisions.
VI.
Because the company has no employees, it did not determine or pay statutory employee profit
sharing.
VII.
I used the selective testing method to check the balances of the accounts listed in the Annexes with
the comparative analysis of the expenditures sub-accounts, and to run a comparative analysis of the
comprehensive financing sub-accounts while performing the corresponding reconciliations, when appropriate,
as follows: A) the differences with the basic financial statements arising from reclassifications for filing
purposes, and B) the determination of deductible and non-deductible amounts for income tax purposes.
VIII.
During the year ended December 31, 2015, I had no knowledge that the Entity might have obtained
resolutions from tax or judicial authorities (Federal Tax and Administrative Law Tribunal or the Supreme
Court of Justice of the Nation, District Courts, and the Collegiate Circuit Court), or that it enjoyed tax
incentives, exemptions, subsidies or tax credits, except for the following:

The Entity, as a consolidated company, filed a notice on February 17, 2014, to determine its
consolidated tax results during the fiscal year 2014, under the terms set forth by Section XVII of the Ninth
Provisional Article of the 2014 Income Tax Act, and Rule I.3.22.8 of the 2014 Omnibus Tax Bill.
IX.
During the year, the Entity was not jointly and severally liable as a tax withholder on the
sale of shares by residents abroad.
X.
It was not practical to determine the percentage of the scope of the review of exchange rate
fluctuations; however, I did review the results of the currency fluctuations checking the rates
applicable at the date of the transaction, as well as the payment, collection, and exchange at year
end.
XI.
The Entity’s balances with its main related parties at December 31, 2015, are disclosed in
Note 14 to the financial statements, included in the Annex with the “Notes to the Financial
Statements” on SIPRED. Transactions with related parties carried out during the year are disclosed
in the Annex titled “Transactions with Related Parties” on SIPRED.
XII.
Within the scope of my selective testing, I confirmed compliance with the obligations
relating to transactions with related parties as set out by Article 11, 27, Section XIII; Article 28,
Sections XVII, paragraph four, subparagraph B), XVIII, XXVII, XXIX and XXXI; and Article 76
Sections IX, X and XII of the Income Tax Act.
XIII. During the year ended December 31, 2015, according to the terms provided in the Annex on
General Information in SIPRED for 2015, the Entity incorporated information related to the
application of some of the different criteria reported by the tax authorities, as applicable, pursuant to
subparagraph H) of Section I of Article 22 of the CFF in force at December 31, 2015. The taxpayer
stated in the referenced Annex that it did not apply these criteria during the year ended December
31, 2015.
XIV. Within the scope of my selective testing, I reviewed the information the taxpayer stated in
its information return filed in the following Annexes of the multiple information returns without
observing any omissions:

Annex 2 “Information about Excise Tax (IEPS) and Value Added Tax (VAT) payments and
withholdings.”

Annex 4 “Information about Residents Who Live Abroad,” in the case of taxes withheld
from residents living abroad

Annex 9 “Information about Related Parties Abroad.”
Other issues
3.
My answers to the questions asked in the tax diagnosis questionnaires and about transfer
pricing that are part of the information included in the SIPRED, are based on the result of my audit
of Mexichem, S.A.B. DE C.V.’s basic financial statements taken as a whole at December 31, 2015
and for the year ended on that date, which was performed in accordance with the International
Standards on Auditing (ISA); consequently, the answers that indicate the taxpayer’s compliance
with the tax provisions are supported with: A) the result of my audit performed in accordance with
ISA, or B) the fact that I checked during my audit according to ISA and did not find that the
taxpayer breached any of its tax obligations.
Some answers to the tax diagnosis and transfer pricing questionnaires were left blank because 1)
they do not apply to the Entity, 2) there is no possible answer, or 3) the information was not
reviewed because it was not part of the scope of my audit, which does not constitute a breach of the
tax provisions.
4.
In relation to the answers given by the Entity on the taxpayer’s tax diagnosis and transfer
pricing questionnaires included in the Annexes titled “General Information” and “Taxpayer
Information about its Transactions with Related Parties,” respectively, that are part of the
information contained in the SIPRED, I have analyzed and checked to make sure that the answers
are consistent with the results of my audit performed in accordance with International Standards on
Auditing (ISA).
Consequently, the answers indicating the taxpayer’s compliance with the tax provisions, are
grounded in the fact that during my audit, I checked and had no knowledge of any breach of the tax
obligations mentioned in these questionnaires.
Also, some questions require information that is not part of the basic financial statements, so the
answers were provided by the Entity and are not part of the scope of my audit.
5.
At December 31, 2015, I did not identify any material differences in contributions payable
by the taxpayer or in its capacity as a tax withholder.
Mexico City
July 28, 2016
[Illegible signature]
CPA Carlos Mariano Pantoja Flores
AGAFF Record Number 14393
gob.mx
Tax Administration Service
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ACCEPTANCE
Tax Opinion
Folio:
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN):
Name, or business or corporate name:
CPA’s TIN:
CPA’s Name:
CPA’s registration number:
Filing date and time:
Acceptance date and time:
For the following item:
For the period:
503165
_MEX8311174TA
MEXICHEM, S.A.B DE C.V.
PAFC681106KBA
CARLOS MARIANO PANTOJA FLORES
14393
07/28/2016 – 16:07:13
07/28/2016 – 16:07:13
Reception of tax opinion on 28CONSOLIDATION AND INCORPORATED
COMPANIES
01/01/2015 through 12/31/2015
Original string:
Digital stamp:
Your personal information is incorporated, protected, and handled by the SAT’s personal
information systems within the institution’s jurisdiction, and can only be provided in the terms set
out by Article 69 of the CFF and other laws.
If you wish to change or correct your personal information, you can do so through Mi Portal or go
to your Local Taxpayer Services office.
This information is provided in compliance with the 17th for Protection of Personal Information,
published in the Federal Official Gazette on September 30, 2005.