Guides · Capital
How do you move capital from Latin America to buy in the United Kingdom?
The obstacle is almost never getting the money out: it is evidencing it. Most Latin American jurisdictions allow investing abroad subject to channelling and reporting obligations that vary by country. What is worth preparing early is the requirement on the other side: a British law firm will ask for six to twelve months of statements for every account the money has passed through, a documented explanation of how the wealth was built, and translation and certification of all of it. That part takes weeks and is best started before reserving. On the British side there is no exchange control: no authorisation is needed to bring money in, and none exists to take it out.
First, because it changes the whole frame
The United Kingdom has no exchange control. There is no prior authorisation to bring capital in, no registration of the investment with a central bank, no quota, no minimum holding period and no withholding when the money is repatriated on a sale. Sterling comes in and goes out.
All the friction in a transfer to the United Kingdom sits on the origin side. On the British side you only have to evidence where the money came from, which is demanding but is not an authorisation: nobody can say no.
For anyone coming from a jurisdiction with a formal exchange regime, that difference is substantive and worth being clear about before reading the rest of this guide: what follows describes documentation, not permissions.
Two different obligations that get confused
Worth separating from the outset, because they are resolved by different professionals at different moments.
- The obligation at origin: channelling the outflow through the formal system and reporting it to your country's central bank or tax authority, as applicable. Resolved with your bank and your local adviser.
- The obligation at destination: evidencing to the British law firm where the money came from, with documents. Resolved between you, your bank and the firm, and it is the one that takes the most time.
Meeting the first does not excuse the second. Deals have fallen through with a buyer entirely in order at home who could not document the source to the firm's satisfaction inside the contract deadline.
What the British side requires
A British law firm is subject to anti-money laundering regulation and is personally answerable for its checks. With a non-resident buyer, enhanced due diligence applies, which in practice means:
- Source of funds: where the specific money for this purchase comes from. Typically six to twelve months of statements for every account it has passed through, not just the last one. Consolidating everything into one account before sending it does not avoid the requirement: they will ask for the originating accounts too.
- Source of wealth: how your financial position was built in general. Sale of a business, dividends, inheritance, professional practice. Evidenced with deeds, tax returns, contracts or audited accounts, not with a verbal explanation.
- Identity and address: with documents that in many cases must be certified by a regulated professional in your country of residence.
- Translation: documentation not in English is asked for translated and, frequently, with a sworn translation.
The commonest mistake is not having a dubious source: it is being unable to document a perfectly legitimate one to the depth and in the format the firm asks for.
What delays or blocks a deal
- Third party funds. Money arriving from a relative's account, an unrelated company or a partner triggers additional checks on that person or entity. If there is going to be a donor or a co-investor, declare it from day one.
- Bridging accounts. Moving the money through two or three jurisdictions before it arrives multiplies the documentation rather than simplifying it.
- High-risk jurisdictions. If the money passes through a country on the United Kingdom's high-risk lists, the firm must apply further enhanced checks.
- Untranslated or uncertified documentation. The most frequent reason and the most avoidable.
- Starting late. Beginning the evidence process once the contract is signed is the usual way to lose a deposit.
The framework at origin, by jurisdiction
What follows describes the general framework in three jurisdictions. It does not replace a local exchange and tax adviser, and procedures, thresholds and forms change: check against the official source before acting.
Chile
There is no exchange control preventing investment abroad, but there is a reporting obligation to the Central Bank. Chapter XII of the Compendium of Foreign Exchange Regulations requires remittances abroad for investments, deposits or loans to be reported where they exceed 10,000 dollars or the equivalent. Above certain balance thresholds there are also periodic reporting obligations.
On tax, a Chilean tax resident is taxed on worldwide income, so income from the British property is declared to the Servicio de Impuestos Internos, with whichever sworn statements the case requires.
Colombia
The most formalised procedure of the three. Colombian capital invested abroad must be channelled through the foreign exchange market via an authorised exchange market intermediary, using the international investments form —number 4 of the Banco de la República— and not the services and transfers form, which is number 5. It is a frequent misclassification, and one with consequences.
Where the transaction is channelled correctly, registration of the investment with the Banco de la República is done automatically on supplying the minimum data, with no further step. If the investment was made without channelling, then it does have to be registered expressly.
To that are added obligations to the DIAN and, where applicable, wealth tax, which for tax residents reaches assets held abroad as well.
Mexico
There is no exchange control and no channelling obligation equivalent to Colombia's. The obligation is fiscal: a Mexican tax resident is taxed on worldwide income, regardless of where it is held or whether it is repatriated. Property income and, where applicable, the gain on sale go into the annual ISR return, crediting tax paid in the United Kingdom under the double taxation treaty.
The order to do it in
- Before looking at assets. Speak to your local adviser and confirm what channelling and what reporting apply to your case.
- Before reserving. Gather the source of funds and source of wealth documentation, translated and certified. It is what takes longest.
- When instructing the firm. Hand over the complete pack at once. Delivering it in pieces multiplies the rounds of questions.
- Before completion. Coordinate the transfer with time to spare: large international payments can require additional checks by the sending bank on the day.
Related questions
Sources
- Banco Central de Chile — Compendium of Foreign Exchange Regulations, Chapter XII.
- Banco de la República — International investments and registration declarations.
- Servicio de Administración Tributaria — Foreign income of Mexican residents.
- The Law Society and British law firms — source of funds requirements and enhanced due diligence under UK anti-money laundering regulations.
What Acacias does with this
We coordinate the British side: we agree the exact document list with the firm before you reserve, check the pack is complete and translated, and synchronise the transfer with the completion timetable. The origin side you resolve with your local adviser, and we work alongside them. We never move or hold client funds at any point.
General information drawn from the official sources listed at the end. Procedures, thresholds and forms change and vary with the specific case. This is not exchange, tax or legal advice, nor an invitation to invest. Always consult an authorised adviser in your jurisdiction of residence. Acacias Capital Ltd is not authorised or regulated by the FCA.