Post by firoj1919 on Feb 21, 2024 23:59:06 GMT -5
The establishment of rates by means of Decree is based on §2 of article 27 of Law No. which transferred the power to reduce and restore the rates of contributions to PIS and Cofins levied on financial revenues to an infra-legal act. earned by legal entities subject to the non-cumulative regime of the aforementioned contributions. Thus, according to the aforementioned law, it is possible for the aforementioned rates to be reduced or reestablished by act of the Executive Branch, observing the limits established by law. On the subject, the Federal Supreme Court, in an Extraordinary Appeal with General Repercuss, when analyzing the observance of the principle of tax legality odom for the legislator to carry out dialogue with the regulation regarding aspects of the incidence matrix rule tax.
In the specific case of the aforementioned Extraordinary Appeal, the STF confirmed the constitutionality of the device, establishing the following thesis of General Repercussion: "The flexibility of tax legality contained in § 2 of article 27 of Law No. 10,865/04 is constitutional, which allowed the Executive Branch, by predicting the conditions and setting the ceilings, to reduce and reestablish the contribution rates to PIS and COFINS levied on financial income earned by legal entities subject to the non-cumulative Oman Mobile Number List regime, with the development of an extra-fiscal function". In this sense, when dealing with Decree No. the STF considered that it was not a rule offensive to the principle of legality, since its legal provision did not deal with the increase in tax rates, but rather, it dealt with the reestablishment of the rates, previously determined in law, for Contributions to PIS/Pasep and Cofins levied on financial income earned by legal entities subject to the non-cumulative calculation regime.
In a similar case, in which the possibility of the Executive Branch establishing coefficients to reduce the rates of contributions to PIS/Pasep and Cofins levied on gross revenue earned from the sale of alcohol was analyzed (Direct Unconstitutionality Action No. 5,277), the STF maintained its understanding in order to confirm as constitutional the relaxation of tax legality contained in paragraph 2, article 27 of Law 10,865/04. However, in the judgment of ADI No. 5,277, in addition to deciding on the principle of legality, it should be noted that the STF determined the need to observe the nonagesimal precedence in cases in which there is an increase in the contribution to PIS/Pasep or Cofins due to through an authorized decree. According to Minister Dias Toffoli, rapporteur.
In the specific case of the aforementioned Extraordinary Appeal, the STF confirmed the constitutionality of the device, establishing the following thesis of General Repercussion: "The flexibility of tax legality contained in § 2 of article 27 of Law No. 10,865/04 is constitutional, which allowed the Executive Branch, by predicting the conditions and setting the ceilings, to reduce and reestablish the contribution rates to PIS and COFINS levied on financial income earned by legal entities subject to the non-cumulative Oman Mobile Number List regime, with the development of an extra-fiscal function". In this sense, when dealing with Decree No. the STF considered that it was not a rule offensive to the principle of legality, since its legal provision did not deal with the increase in tax rates, but rather, it dealt with the reestablishment of the rates, previously determined in law, for Contributions to PIS/Pasep and Cofins levied on financial income earned by legal entities subject to the non-cumulative calculation regime.
In a similar case, in which the possibility of the Executive Branch establishing coefficients to reduce the rates of contributions to PIS/Pasep and Cofins levied on gross revenue earned from the sale of alcohol was analyzed (Direct Unconstitutionality Action No. 5,277), the STF maintained its understanding in order to confirm as constitutional the relaxation of tax legality contained in paragraph 2, article 27 of Law 10,865/04. However, in the judgment of ADI No. 5,277, in addition to deciding on the principle of legality, it should be noted that the STF determined the need to observe the nonagesimal precedence in cases in which there is an increase in the contribution to PIS/Pasep or Cofins due to through an authorized decree. According to Minister Dias Toffoli, rapporteur.