Before and after joining the O.E.C.D. in 2020, Colombia was an enthusiastic adopter of international tax policies promoted by the O.E.C.D.’s B.E.P.S. Project. Two motivations spurred this action. First, the government wished to overcome technical gaps in the domestic legislation of cross-border taxation. Second, the government sought additional revenue from nonresident companies doing business with clients based in Colombia. However, the Significant Economic Presence (“S.E.P.) regime breaks with the tradition of adopting modifications in a way that is consistent with O.E.C.D. policies. Colombia created the S.E.P. regime as a unilateral alternative to the global proposal of Pillar 1, rejecting this proposal based on two strategic considerations. The first was the low probability of global implementation. The second was the expansion of the tax base beyond that provided by Pillar 2. Depending on your viewpoint, the S.E.P. regime contains certain elements that resemble an income tax and other elements that resemble a V.A.T. Eric Thompson, a Partner of attorneys Cañón Thompson in Bogota, takes a deep dive in his article and tells all. He suggests that a tax that was intended to raise revenue from nonresident suppliers may simply result in price increases in Colombia. Who knew that could happen?