Post by account_disabled on Mar 5, 2024 23:00:17 GMT -5
A new request for review, this time from Minister Dias Toffoli, suspended the judgment of two Extraordinary Appeals that question the Federal Court's decision on the application of an indexer for monetary correction in Corporate Income Tax. The REs were filed, respectively, by Indústria de Materials Elétricos (Intral S/A) and Construalv Empreendimentos Imobiliários Ltda against the Union.
According to the companies, the Federal Regional Court of the th Region considered two norms constitutional (article , paragraph , of Law ,/ and article , of Law ,/) that established an index — National Treasury Obligation ( OTN) — for the monetary correction of the financial statements of legal entities.
According to the companies, this implied the taxation of a fictitious profit, causing companies to pay undue Income Tax and Social Contribution since the entry into force of these laws.
The authors of the resources argue that the monetary correction should be calculated on the value of the OTN of NCz$ [ Cruzados novo ], based on the inflation of the Consumer Price Index of January of %, and not the OTN of NCz$ , based BTC Number Data on the official inflation index of January , worth %. For this reason, they maintain that the payment of Corporate Income Tax and Social Contribution on Profit for the base year and subsequent years should not be required, without considering the physical effects of the correction of their financial statements by setting the OTN January at NCr$, instead of NCr$
When appealing to the Supreme Court, the companies claim that the establishment of a low value for the correction index linked to the OTN, set below the real loss of the purchasing power of the currency, has caused, during the monetary correction of the companies' financial statements, an increase artificial basis of the Income Tax calculation and, consequently, applied reality taxation that does not correspond to an acquisition of income but rather to the company's assets.
In this way, they maintain that the provisions would be violating the constitutional principle of contributory capacity by entailing taxation of assets, giving the tax confiscatory effects.
In this sense, they claim that, in order to impose the property tax requirement, it would be necessary to issue a complementary law, as determined by the Federal Constitution (article , item I and article.
According to the companies, the Federal Regional Court of the th Region considered two norms constitutional (article , paragraph , of Law ,/ and article , of Law ,/) that established an index — National Treasury Obligation ( OTN) — for the monetary correction of the financial statements of legal entities.
According to the companies, this implied the taxation of a fictitious profit, causing companies to pay undue Income Tax and Social Contribution since the entry into force of these laws.
The authors of the resources argue that the monetary correction should be calculated on the value of the OTN of NCz$ [ Cruzados novo ], based on the inflation of the Consumer Price Index of January of %, and not the OTN of NCz$ , based BTC Number Data on the official inflation index of January , worth %. For this reason, they maintain that the payment of Corporate Income Tax and Social Contribution on Profit for the base year and subsequent years should not be required, without considering the physical effects of the correction of their financial statements by setting the OTN January at NCr$, instead of NCr$
When appealing to the Supreme Court, the companies claim that the establishment of a low value for the correction index linked to the OTN, set below the real loss of the purchasing power of the currency, has caused, during the monetary correction of the companies' financial statements, an increase artificial basis of the Income Tax calculation and, consequently, applied reality taxation that does not correspond to an acquisition of income but rather to the company's assets.
In this way, they maintain that the provisions would be violating the constitutional principle of contributory capacity by entailing taxation of assets, giving the tax confiscatory effects.
In this sense, they claim that, in order to impose the property tax requirement, it would be necessary to issue a complementary law, as determined by the Federal Constitution (article , item I and article.