Panama negotiated an agreement for the exchange of financial information with Colombia under international pressure leaving it weak due to the Mossack Fonseca case mismanagement, according to experts.
It was also questioned that a negotiation about the matter of the tariffs imposed by this neighboring country on textiles and footwear in the Colon free zone would have not been included.
However, entrepreneurs, economists and international affairs experts all agree that if a negotiation over Colombia-discriminatory measure to impose tax on textiles and footwear in the Colon Free Zone was not filed, an opportunity has been lost and this shows a lack of experience.
So far, whether the tariffs matter has been treated at the table of negotiation between the teams of the two countries has not been reported, since they are kept in confidential status.
From 2012, Colombia applied tariffs of 10% on footwear and textiles in the Colon Free Zone and a charge of five dollars for each container.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has already ruled in Panama´s favor, however, Colombia appealed this decision with offensive arguments against Panamanians and a decision is being expected.
"They have an interest in being paid taxes and in us, not to continue doing damage to the free zone," said economist Juan Jovani.
He indicated that there are two binational interests and in reconciliation during negotiations could have been achieved.
However, he indicated that this derives from the recent scandal over the law firm Mossack Fonseca who got Panama in trouble.
"By not addressing this problem in time, now we are negotiating with weakness", he said.
Julio De La Lustra, President of the National Council of private enterprise (Conep), indicated that it was a golden opportunity to try to bring order to tariffs and the lack of cooperation by Colombia on this issue.
"I understand that there is great pressure from the Organization for the economic cooperation and development (OECD), which forces at a given time to the negotiators to take some course of action and this course involves, unfortunately, making agreements with other countries, and one of them is Colombia, with which we have this irregular situation", he said.
He noted that some sectors believe that it should have been more forceful, but there is a reality: "We are not an island and have to follow rules requiring today's world".
"I understand there is great negotiation on this issue and that Colombia understands that not it can still make us what us has been doing during this time, in relation to the exclusion of Panama on issue of textile import", said.
Rommel Adames, former minister of foreign trade, said that if we are going to be giving information about tax issues, we cannot continue the discrimination, especially if we are going to work together, and with this tariff item we are still in disadvantage.
"It is not only the fact that we need to take the opportunity to negotiate on tariffs, but we should also understand that Colombia has been condemned three times by the WTO due to its illegal actions, however, they appealed and those successive panels before the international body allow us to impose sanctions on Colombia, but we have not gone ahead with that decision", said the expert.
With the agreement to be signed in June, Colombian investors will have to declare their assets in Colombia and pay the differential tax in their country of origin.
According to the President of the Colombian Panamanian Chamber of Trade, Eduardo Cristo, for the Colombian companies in Panama, taxes are very high in their country of origin, on the other hand, in Panama they are more economical, but it is not an issue of laundering of assets and tax evasion.
In spite that Colombian Panamanian Chamber of Trade points out that Colombian investment in Panama amounted to 6,550 million dollars, Colombian authorities indicated that there is 18 billion dollars.
Declarations by Juan Ricardo Ortega, former head of the National Directorate of Taxes and Customs (Dian) given to El Expectator newspaper indicate that the Government must determine how much is legal.
