VZCZCXYZ0012
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHPE #0349/01 0271640
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 271640Z JAN 06
FM AMEMBASSY LIMA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8380
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 2899
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 9963
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ JAN SANTIAGO 0123
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 8984
RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 2211
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 3258
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 6471
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC

UNCLAS LIMA 000349 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR WHA/AND, WHA/CEN, WHA/EPSC, EB/IFD/OFD, EB/CBA, 
EB/IFD/OIA 
TREASURY FOR OASIA/INL, DO/GCHRISTOPOLUS 
COMMERCE FOR 4331/MAC/WH/MCAMERON 
USTR FOR BHARMAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EINV ECON KIDE PE
SUBJECT: COMMERCIAL DISPUTE SUCCESS STORIES - MOTOROLA, 
PARSONS AND SCIENTIFIC GAMES 
 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary.  Aside from the ATPDEA commercial 
disputes, Embassy Lima handles a substantial number of other 
commercial disputes.  Over the past two months, three of 
these cases have been successfully resolved in favor of the 
U.S. companies.  In Motorola's case, the Tax Court disagreed 
with the Peruvian Tax Authority's (SUNAT) assertion that 
Motorola owed more than $20 million in back taxes.  In the 
Scientific Games case, Post worked closely with key GOP 
officials and President Toledo to stop the enactment of a 
proposed law that would have caused a U.S.-led consortium's 
investment of $30 million to leave operations in Peru. 
Parsons/Cesel, after winning its arbitration case against 
PARSSA in 2004, received two partial payments of $1.9 
million and approximately $382,000 in December 2005 and 
January.  These cases highlight Post's advocacy efforts and 
coordination with the GOP to help resolve pending cases and 
improve the ability of U.S. companies to do business in 
Peru.  End Summary. 
 
Motorola 
-------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Between 1997-1998, Motorola worked with Telefonica 
de Peru to build and deploy the first CDMA mobile phone 
network in Peru.  The term of the contract was four years; 
the value of the project was $500 million.  At the end of 
1998, the Peruvian tax authority (SUNAT) charged Motorola 
with having incorrectly deducted certain expenses in its 
1997 tax filings.  In 2000, SUNAT used the same basis to 
charge Motorola for incorrectly filing its 1999 tax return. 
SUNAT sent the company two bills for fines and penalties 
totaling $4.8 million for the 1999 filing and $16 million 
for the 1997 filing. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) After several years, the 1999 case came before the 
Tax Court in mid-2004.  In September 2004, Motorola argued 
before the Court that its expenses noted on its tax filings 
in 1999 were legitimate business expenses.  In December 
2004, the Tax Court ruled in favor of Motorola.  However, 
the GOP had approved a law on October 24, 2004 that allowed 
SUNAT to challenge the tax court's decision and the case was 
referred to the Supreme Court.  In January 2005, the Supreme 
Court upheld the Tax Court's decision in Motorola's favor 
regarding the 1999 filing.  SUNAT, due to lack of support 
from the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) and the Tax 
Ombudsman, was unable to challenge the Supreme Court's 
decision. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) The Supreme Court decision and subsequent actions 
by the MEF and the Tax Ombudsman established a precedent to 
resolve the 1997 case using the same legal considerations. 
The Embassy had worked with the MEF, encouraging it to turn 
down SUNAT's request to take the matter to the Supreme 
Court.  The MEF, however, allowed the case to move to the 
Supreme Court.  On December 9, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled 
in favor of Motorola on its 1997 tax case.  The overall 
savings to the company was $20.8 million. 
 
Scientific Games 
---------------- 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Georgia-based Scientific Games Corporation (SGC) 
contacted us in early July to seek USG assistance in saving 
its $30 million investment in the Peruvian Lottery system. 
The company had partnered with Louisiana-based International 
Lotto Corporation and three Peruvian handicapped 
associations to form a consortium in Peru.  The 
consortium provides 600 jobs for handicapped Peruvians, 
income for several well-known Peruvian associations for the 
handicapped (Anne Sullivan Center for the Blind) and tax 
revenue for the Peruvian government.  The U.S. company's 
Greek competitor had initiated a law in Congress that would 
have changed the legal framework under which the investment 
had been made, thereby forcing the U.S.-led consortium out 
 
 
of business. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  On July 5, the Ambassador sent a letter to 
President Toledo on behalf of the company  (Note:  the 
American Chamber of Commerce sent letters in June to both 
the Prime Minister and the Minister of Women's Affairs to 
make them aware of the issue.  The letters did not prevent 
the Council of Ministers from approving the law.  End Note.) 
That same day, President Toledo and his Cabinet attended the 
U.S. Independence Day reception at the Ambassador's 
residence.  Ambassador Struble and the Commercial Counselor 
raised the issue directly with President Toledo, who agreed 
to examine the case.  On July 6 in the morning, Scientific 
Games local counsel met with the President's staff to review 
the problems with the law. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) As a result of these combined efforts, President 
Toledo issued a resolution against the law on July 6.  The 
next day, several Peruvian Handicapped Associations rallied 
in front of the Presidential Palace to express their 
appreciation to President Toledo for his action. 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  In December 2005, patrons of the Greek competitor 
once again introduced a bill into Congress to modify the 
investment framework for gaming companies.  We responded 
again by counseling Scientific Games' legal counsel and 
calling MEF interlocutors to make them aware of the repeated 
attempt to force a U.S. company out of business. The bill 
died in committee.  Legislators then presented and 
unanimously passed a bill that allows the company to 
continue operations. 
 
Parsons 
------- 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  Parsons/Cesel entered into a consulting services 
agreement with state-owned PRONAP (now PARSSA) to provide 
design services for potable water supply and wastewater 
systems.  During the performance of the contract, 
Parsons/Cesel performed additional work at the direction of 
PRONAP but had yet to receive payment.  Parsons/Cesel 
initiated arbitration in June 2001 in order to recover the 
costs for this additional service.  In March 2004, the 
arbitration panel found in favor of Parsons and ordered the 
state-owned company to pay approximately $1.5 million.  The 
GOP disagreed with the binding arbitration decision and 
appealed to the Judiciary in April 2004, requesting an 
annulment of the arbitration decision.  According to the 
GOP, the arbitration panel was neither independent nor 
impartial, as PARSSA was not included in the process of 
determining the arbiters. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) The case proceeded to the Judiciary for action. 
After a year, in August 2005, the Judiciary issued its 
ruling in favor of Parsons/Cesel, denying a GOP appeal to 
reject the binding arbitration.  The court ordered PARSSA to 
pay the amount owed, which with interest could total 
approximately $3 million.  On September 2, the Ministry of 
Housing appealed the August ruling in favor of Parsons, 
claiming there were irregularities in the handling of the 
arbitration case.  Parsons/CESEL formally appealed the 
submission of the case in October 2005, citing a mid-July 
Supreme Court Directive that instructed the Judiciary to not 
overturn arbitration decisions. 
 
¶11.  (SBU)  After the Ambassador and Commercial Counselor 
sent repeated letters to the Minister and Vice Minister of 
Housing on Parsons behalf, the company received a $1.9 
million partial payment for its arbitration award on 
December 23.  In early January, Parsons received a second 
partial payment of soles/1.3 million (approximately 
$382,000).  Parsons and the GOP continue to negotiate the 
final payment of the remaining soles/480,000 (approximately 
$141,000) in legal fees. 
 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶12.  (SBU)  The GOP, with the assistance of Commercial 
Disputes Coordinator Aurelio Loret de Mola, has made strides 
to resolve the ATPDEA disputes.  Success, however, breeds 
more work:  the number of U.S. companies that have 
approached the Embassy requesting advocacy has increased. 
Post, specifically the Front Office, FCS and Econ offices, 
have established strong working relationships with key GOP 
officials to resolve these and other cases.  The resolution 
of these cases, particularly Parsons/Cesel, with the Supreme 
Court Decree to uphold arbitration awards, should have far- 
reaching positive effects for companies doing business in 
Peru. 
 
STRUBLE