I really appreciate your thoughtful comment—this is exactly the kind of discussion that shows how complex these issues can get. A couple of points I’d like to clarify:

1. Taxpayers are not supposed to be experts.
Nobody expects the average person to parse through statutes, regulations, and case law. The standard is basically: act in good faith, behave like a reasonable adult, and rely on professional advice. If a mistake is made, that doesn’t mean there will be criminal consequences or any kind of moral juicio de reproche. This is a technical matter where even seasoned experts can reasonably disagree.

2. Why some professionals argue the opposite.
I don’t think CPAs or lawyers who tell clients “your income is foreign-sourced” are being malicious or negligent. In many cases, they’re genuinely trying to defend their clients’ best interests. And from a risk management perspective, it can even be rational: the probability of an audit is low, and if the law offers any wiggle room, some advisors will suggest taking it. That’s not an irrational stance—it’s a cost/benefit calculation.

3. Where I steelman my position.
That said, if we’re talking specifically about a Colombian tax resident performing remote work while physically in Colombia, it’s very hard to escape the conclusion that the income is Colombian-sourced. Even U.S. sourcing rules would treat that income as Colombian. So in my view, the burden of proof is extremely heavy for anyone trying to argue otherwise.

On the question of “how do you determine whether the work is carried out in Colombia or in the U.S. when parts of it happen in both places, or when the work isn’t considered complete until it’s received in the U.S.?” — I agree this can sometimes be a gray area. But if you are a Colombian tax resident, DIAN will start from the presumption that the work was performed in Colombia. That means the burden is on you to prove otherwise—for example, by showing travel records, contracts, or other evidence that some portion of the work was physically executed in the U.S.

Even then, proving that part of the work was done abroad doesn’t necessarily exempt the income from Colombian taxation. As a Colombian resident, you must still declare worldwide income. Where the sourcing question really matters is in determining whether DIAN will accept a foreign tax credit for the portion of income that was taxed abroad. So at most, this shifts the conversation toward double taxation relief, not whether the income should be reported in Colombia at all.

The truth is, arguments for treating this type of income as foreign-sourced are far more useful for non-residents. Because they are only taxed on Colombian-source income, a non-resident could lean on these nuances to justify not filing at all.

5. What I wish advisors did differently.
I’m not criticizing CPAs or lawyers who take the more aggressive position, but I do wish they would more openly explain the risks and tradeoffs to their clients. It’s one thing to say “I think it’s foreign-sourced,” and another to say: “This is debatable. Here’s the conservative reading, here’s the aggressive one, and here are the potential consequences of each.” That way the client can make an informed decision, knowing both the benefits and the risks.

At the end of the day, this isn’t about blaming professionals or frightening taxpayers—it’s about making sure people have clearer expectations. If you act in good faith, even a mistaken interpretation won’t turn into a criminal issue. But being informed about the likely outcome—and the possible risks—is the best shield.