Cesar Peres Dulac Müller logo

CPDMA BLOG

Category:
Date: April 19, 2019
Posted by: CPDMA Team

STF can define PIS and Confis calculation on import

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) may judge on Wednesday two issues of general repercussion. One of them will define whether ICMS and other contributions should be included in the calculation of PIS and Cofins charged on imports. The other will decide whether charging ICMS on piped water is constitutional.

The process over PIS and Cofins on imports is the extraordinary resource of the Rio Grande do Sul paint importer Vernicitec. It contests the constitutionality of Law No. 10,865, of 2004. The rule established the collection of PIS and Cofins on imports from 2005 onwards.

The company managed to win in the lower courts. In the STF, it has a favorable vote by the retired minister Ellen Gracie.

The extraordinary resource that discusses the taxation of piped water is from the government of Rio de Janeiro. He contests the decision of the 8th Civil Chamber of the Court of Justice of the State of Rio de Janeiro (TJ-RJ), which decided not to levy ICMS, considering that the supply of piped water is an essential public service, within the competence of the Public Power.

In September, the Supreme Court began to analyze the case. The first vote, by Minister Dias Toffoli, prevented the collection. In his view, piped water cannot be considered a commodity, avoiding the incidence of the tax. The trial was interrupted by Minister Luiz Fux's request for a view.

http://www.valor.com.br

Source: Value.

Return

Recent posts

The protection afforded to highly renowned trademarks

In recent weeks, news has been circulating on legal websites that the Federal Court has annulled a registration for the "CHEVETTE DRINK" trademark. The registration, with a nominative presentation, was considered annullable for infringing article 124, item VI, of the Industrial Property Law (LPI), which prohibits the registration of signs of a generic nature, commonly used for [...]

Read more
Electronic Judicial Domicile: companies must register by May 30

Large and medium-sized companies [1] across the country will have until May 30, 2024 to voluntarily register with the Electronic Judicial Domicile, a tool of the Justice 4.0 Program that centralizes information and communications about cases in Brazilian courts. After this deadline, registration will be compulsory, starting [...]

Read more
Was the instability on Instagram and Facebook the result of a court decision?

There has been speculation over the last few days as to whether the instability of the social networks Instagram and Facebook is a result of the court decision handed down by the São Paulo Court of Justice (TJSP), which ordered Meta Platforms, INC., which owns the platforms, to refrain from using the 'META' trademark, first registered in Brazil by the company Meta Serviços [...].

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