Moraes should mediate on Tuesday 15, the first reconciliation meeting between legislative and executive in impasse on the increase in taxes
Brasilia – It doesn’t matter Decision of Minister Alexandre de Moraes of the Federal Supreme Court, Tuesday 15: The companies are already preparing to appeal against the Court against the increase in the taxation of Financial operations tax (IOF)defended by the government of Lula.
Moraes media this Tuesday First conciliation meeting between legislative and executive in the impasse of Iof. THE The government has increased the tax rates and the The legislator suspended the decision through a legislative decreeclaiming that the executive uses regulatory tax to increase collection. In disagreement, the executive turned to the Supreme, who will now give the last word on the legality of the collection.
The nucleus of the discussion concerns If the government can use the IOF collectively or if it goes beyond the function of the tributeAs the legislator claims. By announcing the increase in taxes, the economic team reported that it should have collected $ 20 billion this year, which would have helped to close the accounts. With the resistance of the private sector, the decree has been changed; However, the revenue expectation was $ 12 billion.
Therefore, the action of the companies against the measure can interrupt government plans in the collection of taxes.
In an interview with Estadão, The number 2 of the farm, Dario Durigan, said that the government’s goal is regulatory And that the collection was a secondary consequence: the thesis that the government will defend itself in court.
Last week, The leaders of the Chamber and Senate party reported a way in agreement that accepted an increase in IOF Since the government has reduced taxation, clarify the simple regulatory intention. This Monday 14, the head of the civil house, Rui Costa, made a statement suggesting that the government is not open to agreements.
Companies and taxes a
Whether it’s the pro-government or pro-legislative decision, taxpayers in the service of the private sector are already ready to appeal to the Court on behalf of companies of the most varied sectors.
“Regardless of the final slip, in both cases there is a judicial measure,” says the taxi driver Mendel Macedo of Mendel and Melo Assocredos.
He says that if the government’s thesis is accepted, that the Iof is constitutional, there will be a series of actions in court that question the collection of “risk of draper” operations.
These operations are very common among companies and suppliers and consist in anticipating suppliers payments. So far, this has not been characterized by credit and has not received taxes. In the Iof decree, the government has established that it is a credit operation and that it is worth taxation.
“The executive tried to overcome a decree a new fact of generation, a new constitution of IF incidence on the risk of dredging. But to establish a tribute and a fact of generation, a complementary or ordinary law is necessary; it cannot do it by decree”, says Mendel.
According to him, every company affected by taxation can appeal to the Court claiming that there was a deviation in the principle of rigorous legality and in the competence of the executive by entering into taxation.
“The goal is not to focus IOF on the elaborate risk, regardless of the result of the decision if the presidential decree is constitutional. The fact is that they have pushed a” jabuti “who tries to obtain a taxation on the risk of tie,” says Mendel. “It is possible to request that the appeals were reactive at risk of risk from the beginning of the tax process.”
Mattos Filo Advogados’s tax partner Eduardo Melman Katz has the same opinion and evaluates that the government should bet on a greater reduction in the risk of the risk of discouraging the dispute: the farm has already retired to the first decree, lowering taxation after pressure from the financial sector. However, he says, many companies will have appeal to the court due to the high volume of operations carried out with suppliers.
“Although the result of the negotiation (between government and legislature) Whether it’s reducing the load on the risk of risk, there is a trend for companies to go to court claiming that the charge could not have derived from the decree, “he said.
According to him, retail sale and all industrial branches, from chemist to food, use the method of payment to suppliers and are influenced by taxation.
“The risk of tyras affects the entire economy; the practice of anticipating credits is common on the market and is widespread,” he says.
Many companies have already entered the court by questioning the taxation, but there should be a new wave after the final decision of the StF, the lawyers listened to by Estadão. This is because the taxation is currently paralyzed by StF’s decision and therefore there is no harmful effect to demonstrate. But as soon as the collection has been fired again, the companies must submit an appeal individually in the first place of the Federal Court against the Iof.
The second hypothesis is the Supreme Court to declare the presidential decree that increased the Iof, which is not the basic scenario of the taxpayers. However, it is subject to appeal to recover what has been paid for during the validity of the Iof collection. As shown on the Estadão, The government has collected $ 2 billion with an increase in taxes before the supreme freezes the accusation.
Mendel states that although the decision on constitutionality is binding – that is, valid for all companies – it will be necessary to resort to the court to return the values.
“In the administrative sphere (using the IRS)This can take years. The most effective measure is to go directly to the judiciary by questioning the illegality of collection, “says the taxpayer.
Katz, Mattos Filho, says that the appeal to justice, in this case, should only take place if the revenues make the reimbursement difficult at the beginning.
“Since this type of declarative action is binding, the revenues should not oppose the refund; but if obstacles or obstacles are inserted to delay the payment, the company can appeal to court”, said Katz.
According to him, many companies have kept operations at risk in recent weeks pending the result of the IF impasse and have resorted to alternatives to anticipate the payment to suppliers also using credit rights funds (Fidc).
Source: Terra
Rose James is a Gossipify movie and series reviewer known for her in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the latest releases. With a background in film studies, she provides engaging and informative reviews, and keeps readers up to date with industry trends and emerging talents.
