The system of precedents established by the Brazilian Procedure Code published in 2015 (CPC/2015) is based on the premise that trials of given instruments will have a binding effect on the Judiciary and that, solely for this reason, decisions that do not follow the understanding of such precedents will be challenged by a special lawsuit named “Reclamação”. Decisions with binding effects resulting from: i) trials held by the Federal Supreme Court (STF) in concentrated control of constitutionality; ii) stare decisis (“súmula vinculante”) issued by STF (here, also binding on the Administration, not just for the Judiciary); iii) trials in incidents for assumption of jurisdiction or resolution of repetitive claims; and iv) trials of extraordinary or special repetitive appeals by the STF or the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), respectively.
On April 7, 2018, the State of São Paulo published Complementary Law No. 1,320, of April 6, 2018 ("LC No. 1,320/2018"), resulting from Bill No. 25/2017, which establishes the Program for Stimulating Tax Compliance, “Compliance Program", defining principles for the relationship between taxpayers and the Tax Administration, as well as establishing rules for tax compliance.
A topic has been provoking debates in the administrative tax sphere in the State of São Paulo: the drawing up of infraction notices and impositions of fines (AIIM), based on article 84-A of Law No. 6,374/89, to disregard acts and legal transactions carried out by taxpayers.
in view of the decisions rendered by the Federal Supreme Court in Extraordinary Appeal No. 593,849/MG and Direct Suit of Unconstitutionality ADI No. 2.777/SP” and (ii) CAT Ordinance No. 42/2018, which establishes the procedure to supplement and reimburse the withholding tax for substitution for the scenarios set forth in articles 265, 269, 277, and 426-A of the State’s ICMS Rules.
Ordinance CAT No. 24/2018, enacted on March 23, governed, among other issues, transactions with digital goods and merchandise traded through electronic data transfer.
State Law No. 7,988/18 - RJ, published on June 15, revoked Article 75-A of Law No. 2,657/96 (the ICMS Law) in order to establish new rules regarding the procedures that the tax auditor of the Rio de Janeiro state revenue office must observe in order to disregard legal acts or transactions carried out for the purpose of concealing the occurrence of a taxable event or the nature of the elements giving rise to a tax obligation.
Normative Instruction No. 1,765/17, published on December 4 of last year, conditioned the receipt of offsetting statements for IPI credits, contribution to PIS, Cofins, and negative IRPJ or CSLL balances on prior confirmation of transmission of tax documents in which the right to a credit is demonstrated.
Investment funds have had a prominent place in the Brazilian financial market because they enable the gathering and consolidation of assets from different investors into a single investment channel.
Companies were surprised last September with the enactment of ICMS Convention 106, which aims to regulate the procedures for collection of ICMS applied to transactions with digital goods and merchandise, traded through electronic data transfer, and grants exemption for withdrawals intended for final consumers.
The 2nd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (“STJ”) granted a taxpayer’s appeal to recognize that the ICMS cannot be included in the calculation basis of the Social Security Contribution on Gross Revenue (CPRB). The decision was issued in the judgment on Special Appeal No. 1.732.000/SP, on May 3.
Abuses by the State and especially by the tax authorities to impose taxes without proper legal support are not uncommon. This routine fact, in addition to the excessive tax burden, the enormity of instrumental duties, and the extremely high interest rates on arrears and fines, creates a very difficult environment for Brazil's economic development.
The Plenary Session of the Administrative Council of Tax Appeals met on Monday, September 3, to review 32 proposals for new precedents and to update and cancel certain precedents in force.