Post by account_disabled on Feb 27, 2024 5:59:25 GMT
On November Extraordinary Appealwas judged by the Federal Supreme Court (STF), with general repercussions (Theme 756), one of the most anticipated tax issues in recent years. It was an assessment of the constitutionality of the system of non-cumulative PIS and Cofins, introduced by laws under the argument that such Laws would have introduced a series of restrictions to the concept of input, which is one of the main defining criteria for the appropriation of input credits. The taxpayer requested, among others, the possibility of appropriating credits in relation to all entries of goods and services in its establishments, so that the basis of contributions to PIS and Cofins would be the value added in its activities, in its meaning broader and unrestricted, without any limitation.
In this decision, it was stated that the system of non-cumulative PIS and Cofins provided for in the aforementioned legal commands is constitutional, with the extension of the concept of input being an infra-constitutional matter, reinforcing that the competence to regulate non-cumulative and the concept of inputs is of the ordinary legislator, which we do not seem to be able to fix Chinese Europe Phone Number List in this regard. A more hasty reading of this decision could lead to the conclusion that the restrictions brought by the aforementioned Laws prevailed and consequently, the Union would have been fully successful, but this is not what happened in its entirety. in the judgment of Special Appeal No. which defined the contours of the concept of input in light the essentiality or relevance of the input used in the manufacturing, production or provision of services process for the exploration of the taxpayer's economic activity.
In our view, however, the position expressed by the STF has positive elements, especially for some economic segments such as, for example, retailers and wholesalers, as it gives strength to the understanding of taxpayers in these segments against the limiting vision imposed by the Revenue. Federal, which, illegally, has disallowed the appropriation of credits on essential or relevant expenses incurred by these taxpayers because it considers that such activities do not have a manufacturing or production process. The winning thesis proposed in the rapporteur minister's vote makes it clear that the autonomy to regulate non-cumulative activity and, as a consequence, the extension of the concept of input must be guided by the principles of reasonableness, equality, protection of trust and free competition.
In this decision, it was stated that the system of non-cumulative PIS and Cofins provided for in the aforementioned legal commands is constitutional, with the extension of the concept of input being an infra-constitutional matter, reinforcing that the competence to regulate non-cumulative and the concept of inputs is of the ordinary legislator, which we do not seem to be able to fix Chinese Europe Phone Number List in this regard. A more hasty reading of this decision could lead to the conclusion that the restrictions brought by the aforementioned Laws prevailed and consequently, the Union would have been fully successful, but this is not what happened in its entirety. in the judgment of Special Appeal No. which defined the contours of the concept of input in light the essentiality or relevance of the input used in the manufacturing, production or provision of services process for the exploration of the taxpayer's economic activity.
In our view, however, the position expressed by the STF has positive elements, especially for some economic segments such as, for example, retailers and wholesalers, as it gives strength to the understanding of taxpayers in these segments against the limiting vision imposed by the Revenue. Federal, which, illegally, has disallowed the appropriation of credits on essential or relevant expenses incurred by these taxpayers because it considers that such activities do not have a manufacturing or production process. The winning thesis proposed in the rapporteur minister's vote makes it clear that the autonomy to regulate non-cumulative activity and, as a consequence, the extension of the concept of input must be guided by the principles of reasonableness, equality, protection of trust and free competition.