• Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • English English English en
  • Português Português Portuguese (Brazil) pt-br
Murray Advogados
  • Home
  • The Firm
  • Areas
    • More…
      • Probate and Family Law
      • Capital Stock
      • Internet & Electronic Trade
      • Life Sciences
      • Capital and Financial Market Banking Law
      • Media e Entertainment
      • Mining
      • Intellectual Property
      • Telecommunications Law and Policy
      • Visas
    • Arbitration
    • Adminstrative Law
    • Environmental Law
    • Civil Law
    • Trade Law
    • Consumer Law
    • Sports Law
    • Market and Antitrust Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • International Law and Foreign Trade
    • Corporate Law
    • Labor Law
    • Tax Law
    • Power, Oil and Gas
  • Members
  • News
  • Links
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
  • Search
  • Menu Menu
Murray News

Guarantee in tax litigation may be negotiated

Proposal is included in a bill, which will also deal with the review of trials

06/29/2023


Beto Pereira — Foto: Vinicius Loures/Câmara dos Deputados

Beto Pereira — Foto: Vinicius Loures/Câmara dos Deputados

The rapporteur of the bill on the Administrative Council of Tax Appeals (Carf), Deputy Beto Pereira, is expected to accept the agreement between the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) and Finance Minister Fernando Haddad for cases where there is a tie in the trials of tax litigation, but is likely to make changes in the text, such as increasing the number of installments to settle the debt and creating a “rating of guarantees” — in which good payer companies could negotiate the guarantee offered in tax lawsuits.

The agreement between Mr. Haddad and OAB will allow that in cases of a tie in Carf trials, the taxpayer can pay the debt free of fines and interest if they decide to pay the principal without going to court. The federal government defended the return of the casting vote, in which the tax authorities had the tie-breaking vote. A provisional measure was issued with this content and was in force from January to May, but lapsed.

Mr. Pereira told Valor that the cases tried in this period “need a solution” in his bill and the tendency is to accept an amendment for them to be redone. “Taxpayers who lost their cases have the right to enjoy the benefits we are creating in the law, or they will litigate.”

Another point that the rapporteur intends to modify in the project is the so-called “compliance policy”, in which companies follow the rules established by the tax authorities for complying with tax and ancillary legislation in exchange for access to benefits, such as a faster evaluation of their customs procedures. Mr. Pereira is also considering an amendment that would reduce the fines imposed by the Secretariat of Federal Revenue on these companies — but increase them if fraud, evasion, or recidivism is proven. He needs to discuss this point with Mr. Haddad.

In addition, the rapporteur told Valor that he would accept an amendment proposed by the Federal Revenue auditors to allow them to enter into tax deals with taxpayers before the debt is recorded. This point caused a stalemate with the Attorney General’s Office of the National Treasury (PGFN) and complaints within the ministry that he was not open to dialogue.

In the opinion of members of the Federal Attorney General’s Office (AGU) and the PGFN, this amendment would be a way to exclude prosecutors from negotiating debts, but this model would not be the best because the tax auditors themselves would negotiate the assessments they issue.

One of the main novelties that Mr. Pereira tends to accept is the creation of the “rating of guarantees.” This point would allow companies that are considered to be good payers to negotiate the guarantee in tax lawsuits. In this case, they could, for example, to make a deposit with a smaller amount if they are considered to be solid. With this method, the money would go first to the Treasury account, unlike what happens when companies hire guarantee insurance or obtain injunctions that prevent collection — which leave the federal government without access to the amounts.

Currently, the guarantee must be presented thoroughly, in the same amount of the litigation, as soon as the company takes the dispute to court, either because it has given up at the administrative level or because it has lost in it.

*Por Raphael Di Cunto, Marcelo Ribeiro, Guilherme Pimenta, Beatriz Olivon — Brasília

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/
29 de June de 2023/by Gelcy Bueno
Tags: Guarantee, negociation, tax litigation
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail

Pesquisa

Posts Recentes

  • Embraer’s KC-390 making headway in Europe
  • Federal government’s dividends fall 44%
  • Petrobras, Ibama seek plan B for Equatorial Margin
  • Development Bank to lend R$2.4bn for Embraer exports
  • Government ignores tax authority’s warning amid uncertain revenue forecast

Arquivos

  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
© Copyright 2023 Murray Advogados – PLG International Lawyers - Support Webgui Design
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
Unigel seeks negotiated exit with creditors Visa acquires Brazil’s Pismo for $1bn
Scroll to top