STF legitimizes the Union's obligation to make calculations for the execution of sentences in Special Federal Courts

STF legitimizes the Union's obligation to carry out calculations for the execution of sentences in Special Federal Courts.
ADPF 219

The Plenary of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) decided, unanimously, that the obligation for the Union to make calculations for the execution of the amounts owed in its convictions is valid in judicial decisions taken by the Federal Special Courts (JEF). The understanding given by Minister Marco Aurélio, rapporteur of the case, and accompanied by the other Ministers of the Court, is in the sense that the reversal of this obligation is necessary to maintain the principles of simplicity, procedural economy and speed that permeate the activities of the Special Courts.

Minister Luiz Fux highlighted in his vote that the general rule of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) is that the winner of the action presents the execution values and that, in the case of actions in Special Courts, when involving low-income people, there is no express prohibition on the losing party's collaboration with the determination of the amount. It also highlighted that the Special Courts were created with the purpose of expanding access to Justice and reducing the duration and costs of the process, guidelines introduced by article 98 of the Federal Constitution with the institution of small value civil actions, which reinforces the understanding surrounding the inversion of the obligation under analysis.

STF forms the majority for not removing ICMS from a telecommunications operator when there is customer default
RE 1,003,758; General Repercussion Theme nº 705

A majority among the Ministers of the Federal Supreme Court was formed, by 9 votes to 2, to reach the understanding that the default of the user of telecommunications services does not eliminate the incidence of the Tax on the Circulation of Goods and Services (ICMS) on the providing company. The table corroborates the understanding previously brought by the Second Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) on the matter.

The vote of Minister Alexandre de Moraes, which differs from that brought by the Rapporteur, Minister Marco Aurélio, was followed by the majority in the sense that the user's default does not constitute a legal exclusion from the tax. The Minister also stated that the thesis supported by the company would involve a direct violation of the principle of tax legality and the Federal Constitution. Ministers Nunes Marques, Dias Toffoli, Rosa Weber, Cármen Lúcia, Gilmar Mendes, Luiz Fux, Ricardo Lewandowski and Luis Roberto Barroso followed the divergence.

In this way, the Ministers of the Court established the following thesis: “User default does not eliminate the incidence or enforceability of ICMS on telecommunications services.”

STJ decides to remove the 75% fine imposed on taxpayers who paid IRPF only after notification
REsp 1,825,186

The Second Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) removed the 75% ex officio fine applied to taxpayers who did not declare and determine the capital gain on the sale of a vehicle in Personal Income Tax (IRPF). The score was 3 votes to 2 for the collection of the 20% late payment fine and interest.

Minister Mauro Campbell, Rapporteur of the case, stated that the taxpayer made the payment within the deadline, as the individual or legal entity subject to the tax action must pay, within 20 days following the date of receipt of the term of initiation of the inspection, the taxes and contributions due with the legal additions applicable to the case of spontaneous procedure. Furthermore, the Rapporteur argued that the triggering event for the ex officio fine is the taxpayer's default and the consequent additional movement by the tax authorities of needing to charge the tax that should be declared. This understanding is supported by article 47 of Law 9,430/1996.

Ministers Og Fernandes and Assusete Magalhães accompanied the Rapporteur.

STF states that the Income Tax of state agencies and foundations belongs to the states and the DF, and not to the Union
RE 607.886

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) defined that Income Tax Withheld at Source on income paid by state agencies and foundations does not belong to the Union, but to the states and the Federal District. The understanding was unanimously reached among the Ministers of the Court.

The Rapporteur of the case, Minister Marco Aurélio, stated in his vote that “in the act of withholding the amounts, the product collected is incorporated into the state or district assets. This is why the thesis of transfer of public resources does not prosper, once there is direct and immediate participation in the result obtained”. He further added that “since the federative units are recipients of the withheld tax, their active capacity to collect the tax must be recognized.”

Thus, the Ministers of the Court established the following thesis: “It is the States and the Federal District who own what is collected, considered Income Tax, levied at source, on income paid, in any capacity, by local authorities and foundations that they establish and maintain.”.

RFB and PGFN notice released for tax transaction for processes involving PLR
PGFN Notice No. 11/2021

The Federal Revenue of Brazil (RFB) and the Attorney General's Office of the National Treasury (PGFN) launched a tax transaction notice aimed at the processes under trial that deal with the incidence of social security contributions and destined to other entities and funds and incidents on profit sharing (PLR), in violation of Law No. 10,101/2000. The notice also allows debts to be paid with up to a 50% discount.

For more information on how to adhere to the notice and what payment methods are available, access the entire content of publication.