Cesar Peres Dulac Müller logo


Date: October 22, 2019
Posted by: CPDMA Team

Industry gets injunction before being assessed

The case was analyzed by the 7th TRF of the 1st Region.

An industry in the chemical sector anticipated and took the discussion on goodwill amortization directly to the Courts, even before being assessed by the Federal Revenue Service. The case was analyzed by the 7th Panel of the Federal Regional Court (TRF) of the 1st Region, based in Brasília, which granted an injunction to the manufacturer.

The decision suspends Income Tax (IRPJ) and CSLL debt that may be generated by goodwill calculated by Solenis do Brasil Química with the acquisition of the companies Quimatec and Locatec.

According to the lawsuit (no 1030649-96.2019.4.01.0000), in November 2015, the two companies were acquired for R$ 170 million. The goodwill recorded was R$ 107 million. For the operation, a loan was contracted with Solenis Netherlands, which was fully repaid. In December, the companies were merged into Solenis, which allowed the tax deduction of goodwill.

However, despite meeting the requirements to amortize the goodwill provided for by law (Article 20 of Decree-Law no. , the company claimed that it was not able to issue a protocol, before the Federal Revenue Service or in a notary's office, of the appraisal report of liquid assets within 13 months, whose obligation was introduced by Law 12,973 of 2014.

The report itself, according to the company's defense, was provided within the legal term, on June 29, 2016. There was only delay in registering the document in the notary, provided on July 30, 2018, adjusted by a supplementary report (of July 25, 2019), filed on August 7, 2019.

In the action, the company maintains that the issuance of the report in accordance with the legal requirements and its protocol before the start of any inspection procedure meets the purpose of the rule of ensuring knowledge of the operations and that this fact “cannot make the amortization of the IRPJ and of the CSLL, under penalty of violating the principle of legal certainty”.

He still argues in the lawsuit that the payment for the acquisitions was made in cash and that the operation actually took place. Finally, it stated that, without an injunction, it ran the risk of being assessed at R$ 37 million, which could be accompanied by the improper collection of interest on late payment and a qualified fine of up to 150% on the required taxes. In addition, it may suffer from a series of serious consequences, such as being obliged to offer a guarantee or to make a judicial deposit to maintain its full tax regularity.

When analyzing the process, the rapporteur, federal judge Ângela Catão, understood that the company filed a lawsuit to discuss and prove the facts, which will be reported through an expert examination. “So, at this moment, it would be unfeasible for the company to bear the burden of a high tax execution, which could impede the development of its activities”, says in the decision that protects Solenis from possible collection.

According to Rodrigo Perestrelo, manager of Solenis' legal department for Latin America, the decision brought “a very positive result, especially considering that there was no precedent on the matter under discussion”. Although unusual, the company's decision and strategy to anticipate the discussion in the judicial sphere even before it was inspected and assessed was based, according to Perestrelo, "in the sense of minimizing the risks potentially involved as much as possible".

As it is a relevant issue of significant amount, with a known intense history of inspections, an unfavorable jurisprudential scenario of the Administrative Council of Tax Appeals (Carf) and the risk of possible applications of qualified fines and other penalties, the company, says the lawyer, decided to be conservative and anticipate the discussion in the judicial sphere, without following the usual strategy and standard of tax administrative litigation.

For tax lawyer Maurício Faro, from BMA Advogados, the case is interesting because the company skipped the discussion in Carf to take it directly to justice, which has not been the path traditionally followed by taxpayers. In general, companies, he adds, expect to be eventually sued and then question the matter administratively. They appeal to the last instance of the Council, the Superior Chamber, which has decided in an unfavorable way, and only later they enter the Judiciary.

Source: Adriana Aguiar via Valor Econômico.


Recent posts

Misuse of a trademark by a former partner can be recognized not only as unfair competition, but also as bad faith.

On February 14, the newspaper "Valor Econômico" published an article in which it was pointed out that the São Paulo Court of Justice had recognized unfair competition in the improper use of a trademark by a former partner. The article, however, does not give the number of the case in which it would be possible to analyze more details of the decision, but it does inform that the individuals had signed a [...]

Read more
The first sanctions applied by the National Agency for the Protection of Personal Data (ANPD) were a wake-up call for companies: the LGPD is a serious law and must be complied with.

The General Personal Data Protection Law - Law No. 13,709/18 (LGPD) was published in 2018 and came into force in 2020. This deadline was given to public and private legal entities (processing agents) that collect, store or process the personal data of individuals, in Brazil or abroad, in order to [...]

Read more
Business position on the recent STF decision that ruled that it is constitutional for trade unions to charge assistance contributions

Recently, the Federal Supreme Court (STF) unanimously ruled that unions can collect an assistance contribution, including from non-member employees, in ARE 1.18.459 (Topic 935 of the General Repercussion), as long as the worker is guaranteed the right to object, establishing the following thesis: "it is constitutional to establish, by agreement or [...]

Read more
The new chapter in the legal dispute involving the term "HELLES", registered as a 'trademark'.

Recalling the case... It all started at the beginning of 2019, when the brewery Fassbier gave extrajudicial notice to a series of breweries in Rio Grande do Sul for the alleged misuse of the term HELLES, claiming to have exclusive use of the expression, given that the word was registered as a trademark. Not satisfied with [...]

Read more
Suspension of labor executions against companies in the same economic group

In a recent decision, the STF suspended the processing of labor executions that discuss the inclusion, in the execution phase, of a company that is part of an economic group that did not participate in the knowledge process. In labor proceedings, when the execution phase is reached and the main debtor does not have enough assets to pay the debt, many [...]

Read more
STJ decides that the legal personality of a civil association can be disregarded, but limits liability to the directors

The 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) [1] dismissed a special appeal filed by the directors of a civil association, which had its legal personality disregarded in a case involving the improper use of a trademark. The Court, in a judgment drafted by Justice Marco Aurélio Belizze, held that the disregard of [...]

Read more
linkedin Facebook pinterest youtube lol twitter Instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter Instagram