Cesar Peres Dulac Müller logo


Date: September 14, 2020
Posted by: CPDMA team

The Brazilian taxpayer in the turbulent waters of the STF

The Italian poet Francesco Petrarca in the 14th century, paraphrasing Plutarch, said that “to sail is necessary, to live is not necessary”. Thought represents the conflicting coexistence between the precision of navigating and the imprecision of living. This conflict remains current, more alive than ever. With the technological advance, we have more and more precision for many things in life, and contradictorily, we have more and more uncertainties and inaccuracies in living.

In Brazil, for taxpayers and entrepreneurs, it could not be different.

In recent months, despite the rules of social distancing and, consequently, the impossibility of holding in-person judgment sessions, the Federal Supreme Court ruled and judged several tax issues of great relevance to Brazilian companies.

The STF ruled that the collection of the contribution of 10% to the FGTS on dismissals without just cause was constitutional, a contribution that was charged between 2001 and 2019 and, later, extinguished by the National Congress as of January 2020. The National Treasury Attorney's Office estimated, if it were the collection was deemed unconstitutional, that there would be a need to refund to taxpayers an amount greater than R$ 40 Billion.

Another old dispute recently resolved by the STF concerns the incidence of the Tax on Industrialized Products (IPI) levied on those companies that import goods. The main argument in favor of taxpayers was that there would be no reason to charge the IPI in duplicate: once in the clearance of goods, another in the resale of the product in the domestic market. The Federal Supreme Court, however, considered the constitutionality of charging the IPI on imported goods, especially with a view to protecting the national industry.

A little over a week ago, the STF also ruled on the issue involving the levy of the Employer's Social Security Contribution on the amounts paid to employees under the title of “Constitutional Vacation Third”. The taxpayers argued that the amounts paid in relation to this amount consisted of indemnity items, and not amounts that made up the workers' remuneration. As the Social Security Contribution must be levied only on the remuneration amounts, the taxpayers understood that the portion of the “Constitutional Vacation Term” should be separated from the base on which the tax is levied. In a virtual plenary judgment, however, the STF understood in a different sense, concluding that the "Constitutional Vacation Third" is paid regularly, periodically, and as a form of complement to the worker's remuneration, and should, therefore, be included in the salary base. calculation of the Employer's Social Security Contribution.

As can be seen, the judgments handed down by the STF and briefly reported above had an unfavorable outcome for taxpayers. Although all three discussions were very well founded and with solid arguments in favor of the companies, the STF decided to judge the cases in favor of the tax authorities. Precisely when society in general has great difficulties in following up and participating in the Court's judgments, several decisions were handed down on tax matters, repeatedly unfavorable to taxpayers.

It is necessary to carefully and carefully monitor recent developments in tax matters in the Federal Supreme Court, especially due to the already known economic impacts that this type of judgment has on the public budget. Tax matters, like all others, must be judged technically and, whenever possible, away from class interests or other powers of the republic.

In the coming months, other relevant topics for corporate taxation should be judged, such as: the discussion on the constitutionality of contributions to the S System (SESI, SEBRAE, SENAI, SESC), the possibility of taking PIS/COFINS credits in the acquisition of single-phase products, exclusion of ISS from the PIS/COFINS calculation basis, contribution of the Legal Entity Rural Producer to FUNRURAL, among others. 

In conclusion, it is recommended that companies continue to discuss in court all taxes that may be somehow tainted by illegalities or unconstitutionality, provided that the grounds and arguments that lead to such vices are duly presented. 

As much as the recent wave of judgments carried out by the STF has been mostly unfavorable to taxpayers, it is of paramount importance that companies file lawsuits mainly discussing those issues that have not yet been the subject of a final decision in the STF, whether to enforce their rights before the Tax Authorities, or to guarantee the longest possible period of recovery of values when the Court judges the case in a favorable way to the taxpayers. Sailing is necessary...

In this context, relying on the support of experienced professionals who are used to carrying out tax discussions is essential for the success of your company in the search for greater efficiency in tax assessment, in a prudent and safe way. César Peres Advocacia Empresarial's specialized team in Tax Law is at your disposal to assist in this and other demands of your company.

Source: Wagner Arnold Fensterseifer, attorney at Cesar Peres Dulac Müller, specializes in Tax Law.


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