XML 41 R25.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.4

Commitments And Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments And Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Litigation and Other Legal Matters The Company is subject to certain contingent liabilities with respect to existing or potential claims, lawsuits and other proceedings. The Company accrues liabilities when it considers probable that future costs will be incurred and such costs can be reasonably estimated. Proceeding-related liabilities are based on developments to date and historical information related to actions filed against the Company. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had accounted for estimated liabilities involving proceeding-related contingencies and other estimated contingencies of $53 million t o cover legal actions against the Company in which its Management has assessed the likelihood of a final adverse outcome as probable. Expected legal costs related to litigations are accrued when the legal service is actually provided. In addition, as of December 31, 2022, the Company and its subsidiaries are subject to certain legal actions considered by Management and its legal counsels to be reasonably possible for an aggregate amount up to $358 million. No loss amounts have been accrued for such reasonably possible legal actions, the most significant of which are described below. The following table summarizes the contingencies activity during the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020:
Contingencies | Balance at beginning of year |  | Charged/credited to Net income / loss |  | Charges Utilized/ Currency translation adjustments/ Write-offs and other adjustments |  | Balance at end of year
| (In millions)
Year ended December 31, 2020 | 8 |  |  | 3 |  |  | — |  |  | 11 |
Year ended December 31, 2021 | 11 |  |  | 5 |  |  | (3) |  |  | 13 |
Year ended December 31, 2022 | 13 |  |  | 16 |  |  | 24 |  |  | 53 |
Tax Claims Brazilian preliminary injunction against the Brazilian tax authorities (withholding Income tax) On November 6, 2014, the Brazilian subsidiaries, Mercadolivre.com Atividades de Internet Ltda., eBazar.com.br Ltda., Mercado Pago.com Representações Ltda. and the Argentine subsidiary, MercadoLibre S.R.L., filed a writ of mandamus and requested a preliminary injunction with the Federal Court of Osasco against the federal tax authority to avoid the IRRF (withholding income tax) over payments remitted by the Brazilian subsidiaries to MercadoLibre S.R.L. for the provision of IT support and assistance services by the latter, and requested reimbursement of the amounts improperly withheld over the course of the preceding five (5) years. The preliminary injunction was granted on the grounds that such withholding income tax violated the convention signed between Brazil and Argentina that prevents double taxation. In August 2015, the injunction was revoked by the first instance judge in an award favorable to the federal tax authority. The Company appealed the decision and deposited into court the disputed amounts. In June 2020, the Company’s appeal was dismissed. The Company submitted a new remedy before the same court in July 2020, which was dismissed on February 17, 2021. On March 18, 2021, the Company filed two appeals with the superior courts, which are now pending. As of December 31, 2022, the total amount of the deposits was $171 million (which included $24 million of interest). Such amounts are included in non-current other assets of the consolidated balance sheet. Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing the case is reasonably possible but not probable based on the technical merits of the Company’s tax position and the existence of favorable decisions issued by the Federal Regional Courts. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any expense or liability for the disputed amounts. Interstate rate of ICMS-DIFAL on interstate sales During 2020 and 2021, the Brazilian subsidiaries, eBazar.com.br Ltda. and Mercado Pago Instituição de Pagamento Ltda., filed 15 writs of mandamus with the State Courts of Justice where these companies have sales branches in order to prevent Brazilian states from collecting the ICMS (“Imposto sobre Circulação de Mercadorias, Serviços de Transporte Interestadual, Intermunicipal e Comunicação”) on interstate sales at a differential rate (“ICMS-DIFAL”) without the existence of a complementary law. Four of these cases were filed in 2020 (for the branches of Barueri and Louveira) and the other 11 were filed in 2021, after eBazar.com.br Ltda. opened a new branch in Extrema. On February 24, 2021, the Brazilian Supreme Court ruled on the controversy in a binding precedent, which declared the unconstitutionality of ICMS-DIFAL without the proper complementary law. In the same case, however, the Supreme Court ruled on the modulation of the effects of its decision (with retroactive effect). From those 11 cases filed by the Company after the Supreme Court’s decision (after February 24, 2021), 4 became final and unappealable in favor of the corresponding States (cases related to the branch of Extrema: São Paulo, Rio Grande do Sul, Paraná e Distrito Federal), and therefore their corresponding liabilities were settled with the corresponding judicial deposits. Another one of the 11 cases became final and unappealable in favor of Ebazar.com.br Ltda. Finally, the remaining 6 of those 11 cases are still pending and may not stand because of the modulation of effects with respect to that decision. Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing is probable. For that reason, the Company has recorded a $3 million provision for the disputed amounts related to these 6 cases. With respect to the 4 cases filed by the Company prior to the Supreme Court’s decision (before February 24, 2021), 1 of them became final and unappealable in favor of the Company. Of the remaining 3 cases, for which a judgment is still pending, Management considers that the risk of losing is remote. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any liability for the controversial amounts. The Company deposited into court the disputed amounts. As of December 31, 2022, the total amount of the deposits related to the ongoing cases was $8 million. In January 2022, (therefore, already in the course of fiscal year 2022 and already in full application of the understanding of the Supreme Court for unconstitutionality), supplementary Law No. 190/22 was published, outlining the general rules for the requirement of DIFAL and expressly mentioning the need to comply with the principle of anticipation. Notwithstanding this provision, which expressly points to the need to comply with the anticipation, Brazil’s Federation Units have not complied with this guarantee. Therefore, eBazar.com.br Ltda. and Mercado Pago Instituição de Pagamento Ltda., filed writs of mandamus to the 27 Federation Units, aimed at preventing the Brazilian tax authorities demand payments of the DIFAL. Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing the case is reasonably possible but not probable based on the technical merits of the Company’s tax position. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any expense or liability for the disputed amounts. The Company deposited into court the disputed amounts. As of December 31, 2022, the total amount of the deposits was $21 million. From April to September 2022, the Brazilian subsidiary Mercado Envios Serviços de Logística Ltda., now incorporated by eBazar.com.br Ltda., also filed writs of mandamus to 3 Federation Units (São Paulo, Santa Catarina e Bahia), for the purpose of preventing the Brazilian tax authorities from demanding payment of the DIFAL over their respective fixed assets. The Company deposited into court the disputed amount s. As of December 31, 2022, the total amount of the deposits was $2 million. Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing the case is reasonably possible but not probable based on the technical merits of the Company’s tax position. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any expense or liability for the disputed amounts. Exclusion of ICMS tax benefits from IRPJ and CSLL tax base The Company has ICMS tax incentives granted by the State of Minas Gerais, through a special regime signed with the state by means of a term of agreement, which are aimed at implementing and expanding business in that state. The Company accounted for the tax benefit netting cost of net revenues for $36 million and $15 million for years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively (no impact in the year ended December 31, 2020). On November 9, 2021 the Company filed a writ of mandamus which claimed the exclusion of the amounts relating to the ICMS tax benefits granted by the State of Minas Gerais through the special regime from the tax base of the Corporate Income Tax (IRPJ) and of the Social Contribution on Net Profits (CSLL). On January 31, 2022, a decision was rendered granting the injunction requested in order not to include the amounts of tax benefits granted by the State of Minas Gerais in the tax base of IRPJ and CSLL, without, however, ruling on the requirements set forth in article 30 of Law 12.973/14 and article 38 of Decree-Law 1577/98. A motion for clarification was filed against this decision, which was accepted in order to include in the preliminary injunction the lack of compliance with such requirements. On April 12, 2022, the Office of Attorney-General of the National Treasury manifested itself in the records informing that it had not filed an appeal against the decision that granted the preliminary injunction. The Company is currently waiting for the judicial decision. Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing the case is reasonably possible but not probable based on the technical merits of the Company’s tax position. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any expense or liability for the disputed amounts. The Company accounted for an income tax benefit arising from the ICMS tax incentives during the year ended December 31, 2022 for $17 million, considering the exchange rate as of December 31, 2022, from which $5 million corresponded to the period ended December 31, 2021. Administrative tax claims On October 30, 2020 and November 9, 2020, MercadoPago.com Representações Ltda. and eBazar.com.br Ltda., respectively, received tax assessments claiming income tax payments for the 2016 fiscal year, with respective penalties and fines. In these assessments, the tax authorities do not recognize certain expenses incurred by the Brazilian subsidiaries, such as technology services imported from MercadoLibre S.R.L., Meli Uruguay S.R.L., and MercadoLibre Inc., as deductible for income tax purposes. The tax authorities concluded that the Brazilian entities failed to submit sufficient evidence during the tax assessment that these services were necessary and effectively hired and paid by the Brazilian subsidiaries. The tax assessments that MercadoPago.com Representações Ltda. and eBazar.com.br Ltda. received amounted to a total of $17 million and $13 million, respectively, considering the exchange rate as of December 31, 2022. The subsidiaries filed their defenses on December 1, 2020 and December 8, 2020, respectively, arguing that the agreements and other documentation were submitted as evidence during the tax assessment. The defenses were also complemented by specific descriptions for each project that was impacted by such services to justify the necessity of all the expenses in dispute. On May 25, 2021, MercadoPago.com received an unfavorable decision from the administrative court in the first instance, and on June 28, 2021, eBazar.com.br also received an unfavorable decision from the administrative court in the first instance. The Companies filed appeals in respect of both cases with the administrative court in the second instance, which are now pending. The Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing the case is reasonably possible, but not probable. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any expense or liability for the disputed amounts. On December 30, 2022, eBazar.com.br Ltda. and one of the Company’s Senior Legal Directors received three tax assessments claiming corporate income taxes (IRPJ and CSLL) in the amount of $64 million, withholding income tax (IRRF) in the amount of $9 million, and PIS and COFINS in the amount of $10 million, all of them in relation to the taxable year of 2017, including punitive fine of 150% over the tax charged and interest on late payments based on the SELIC rate, and according to the exchange rate as of December 31, 2022. The Senior Legal Director was assessed as jointly liable with eBazar.com.br, due to his role as statutory officer, under provisions of the National Tax Code that enable joint tax liability for acts potentially in violation of the law or the by-laws. In respect to IRPJ, CSLL, PIS and COFINS, the tax authorities concluded that the Brazilian company failed to report taxable income as the company has made book entries in the profit and loss accounts, reverting previous revenues or other revenue accounts, as well as for using foreign languages such as English and Spanish in its book-keeping. The tax authorities also considered that the company failed in the emission of invoices, disregarding that the company indeed has a Special Tax Regime granted by the Municipality of Osasco that allows the emission of a single invoice per period. Regarding the IRRF, the amount claimed by the tax authorities is already deposited in court under the writ of mandamus that discusses the company’s right not to pay IRRF on payments made to its affiliate in Argentina, due to the provisions of the Brazil and Argentina double tax treaty. Those deposits were incorrectly ignored by tax authorities. The Company presented the objection on January, 30 2023. The Management’s opinion, based on the opinion of external legal counsel, is that the risk of losing the cases is reasonably possible, but not probable in the cases of IRPJ, CSLL, PIS and COFINS, based on the technical merits. In the case of IRRF, the risk of losing the case is remote. For that reason, the Company has not recorded any expense or liability for the disputed amounts. Buyer protection program The BPP program is designed to protect buyers in the Marketplace from losses due primarily to fraud or counterparty non-performance. The Company’s BPP provides protection to consumers by reimbursing them for the total value of a purchased item and the value of any shipping service paid if it does not arrive, arrives incomplete or damaged, does not match the seller’s description or if the buyer regrets the purchase. The Company is entitled to recover from the third-party carrier companies performing the shipping service certain amounts paid under the BPP. Furthermore, in some specific circumstances, the Company enters into insurance contracts with third-party insurance companies in order to cover contingencies that may arise from the BPP. The maximum potential exposure under this program is estimated to be the volume of payments on the Marketplace, for which claims may be made under the terms and conditions of the Company’s BPP. Based on historical losses to date, the Company does not believe that the maximum potential exposure is representative of the actual potential exposure. The Company records a liability with respect to losses under this program when they are probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, Management’s estimate of the maximum potential exposure related to the Company’s buyer protection program is $4,002 million and $2,964 million, respectively, for which the Company recorded a provision of $6 million and $5 million, respectively. Commitments The Company committed to purchase cloud platform services from two U.S. suppliers based on the following terms: a) for a total amount of $824 million, to be fully paid off between October 1, 2021 and September 30, 2026. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had paid $212 million in relation thereto; and b) for a total amount of $108 million, to be fully paid off between September 17, 2021 and September 17, 2024. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had paid $36 million in relation thereto. In September 2022, the Company amended this commitment whereby, effective as of September 23, 2022, the aggregate purchase commitment is $200 million, to be fully paid off between September 23, 2022 and September 23, 2025. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had paid $14 million in relation thereto. In connection with the closing of MELI Kaszek Pioneer Corp (“MEKA”)’s initial public offering on October 1, 2021, MEKA (a special purpose acquisition company sponsored by MELI Kaszek Pioneer Sponsor LLC (the “Sponsor”), which is a joint venture between Company’s subsidiary MELI Capital Ventures LLC and Kaszek Ventures Opportunity II, L.P.) entered into a forward purchase agreement with the Sponsor, pursuant to which the Sponsor committed to purchase from MEKA 5 million Class A ordinary shares at a price of $10 per share in a private placement to close substantially concurrently with the consummation of MEKA’s initial business combination. On April 8, 2022, the Company signed a 10-year agreement with Gol Linhas Aereas S.A. under which the Company is committed to contract a minimum amount of air logistics services for a total annual cost of $43 million (total amount once all the dedicated aircraft are in operation). Pursuant to the agreement, Gol Linhas Aereas S.A. provides logistics services in Brazil to Mercado Envios through six dedicated aircraft, two of which have already started operations as of December 31, 2022.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration