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

STF decides that collective rule that restricts labor rights is constitutional

STF decides that collective rule that restricts labor law is constitutional. The Court observed, however, that the reduction of rights by Collective Agreements or Conventions must respect the guarantees constitutionally guaranteed to workers. The Federal Supreme Court ruled that Collective Bargaining Agreements or Agreements that limit or suppress labor rights are valid, provided that […]

Read more
The eviction action in the judicial recovery

Companies that file a judicial recovery action and have their activities carried out in leased properties may, in the event of default, face an eviction action, even if the credit is listed in the creditors list. On this topic, there are some very important issues being dealt with in the courts regarding the suspension of the demand and about the resumption of the asset during the period of processing of the judicial reorganization.

Read more
Law to reduce bureaucracy of Public Records passed

On June 27th, Law nº 14. 382/2022 was enacted, whose main objective is the creation of the Electronic System of Public Records (SERP), which aims to unify the systems of notary offices throughout the country, reducing the bureaucracy of the national notary system ( the measure covers the registrations of real estate, titles and civil documents of natural persons and […]

Read more
Bidding law and the use of Dispute Boards

In large-scale contracts, complexity, amounts involved, and time are common causes of conflict between the parties. An effective option to help prevent and resolve these disputes is called a dispute board. This method, unlike mediation, arbitration and conciliation, consists of creating a council of technicians, appointed […]

Read more
Tax Benefits to the Events Sector - PERSE Law

The restrictive measures adopted worldwide to minimize the spread of Covid-19 have undeniably brought significant impacts to various sectors of the economy. The determination of isolation or quarantine to face the pandemic, the most effective measure to reduce the circulation of the contagious agent, has made the sector of culture and entertainment events […]

Read more
CVM Resolution No. 80 and the dissonance with the secrecy inherent to arbitration proceedings

In force since May 2, 2022, CVM Resolution No. 80 brings a new notice on corporate demands, regulating the registration and provision of periodic and occasional information from the issuers of securities. Such regulation was the subject of Public Hearing 1/21 and consolidated the content of Instructions No. 367 and 480 […]

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