International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

New VAT split for interstate transactions in Brazil

In April 2015 Constitutional Amendment No 87/2015 (the Amendment) was introduced, providing a new taxation regime for state-level VAT on interstate sales performed remotely. This week, part of the expected regulation was enacted.

The regime essentially covers interstate sales carried out without the physical presence of the acquirer, which clearly encompasses, but is not limited to, e-commerce.

As of 2016, under the new system, the ICMS (state tax) levied on the remittance of goods to a final consumer located in a different state will no longer collected only by the state in which the shipper is domiciled.

With the enactment of the Amendment, which becomes mandatory as of 2016, ICMS will be split with part going to the state of shipment and part going to the destination state.

Agreement 93/2015 (Convênio CONFAZ nº 93/2015 – the Agreement), which was approved this week, seeks uniformity in terms of tax collection and audit/inspection procedures.

Under the existing regime, shippers proceed according to the legislation of the state in which they are domiciled, provided that is the only one collecting taxes.

However, the Agreement provides that the shipper shall comply with the requirements provided by the state tax legislation of the destination, which gives rise to some concerns.

The Agreement provides that shipper shall:

(i) calculate the ICMS levied on the transaction according to the tax rate provided in the destination state;

(ii) be registered, if mandatory by destination legislation, as a taxpayer in such state even in the event there is no facility located therewith; and

(iii) comply with other specific tax reporting duties provided in such legislation.

In addition, tax inspections may be performed by both states involved in the transaction, jointly or separately, which means that the taxpayer will have to comply with specific tax authorities’ requests depending on the area in which the transaction takes place.

Despite not, in our opinion, bringing sufficient procedural rules, the Agreement implies that taxpayers shall observe the legislation of the destination state, which leads to a burden to be carried out by the taxpayer, which will have to improve its transaction-tracking infrastructure as well as change the methods for complying with tax reporting obligations.

It is worth mentioning that the Agreement also refers to the enactment of another statute (Ajuste SINIEF) by the technical committee of CONFAZ providing more details concerning the tax reporting obligations, which may introduce a single method to be imposed by all the states in order to avoid the difficulties described above. Regardless, not only does the short period of time to implement everything present a challenge for taxpayers, but the effects on possible tax credit disputes that may arise from this split are also cause for concern for ICMS taxpayers.

Renata Correia Cubas and Marcel Alcades Theodoro, Mattos Filho, Veiga Filho, Marrey jr e Quiroga, International Tax Review correspondents.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The winners of the ITR Asia-Pacific Tax Awards 2023 have been announced!
Mauro Faggion appeared cautiously optimistic as the European Commission waits to see whether all 27 member states will accept its proposal.
The global minimum rate also won’t entirely stop a race to the bottom, according to a tax director speaking at an ITR conference in London.
The country’s tax authorities are not interested in seeing transfer pricing studies any more, it was claimed at an ITR industry conference in London.
The controversial measure is being watered down after criticism from the European Central Bank.
More than 600 such requests were made in 2022, while HMRC has also bolstered its fraud service, it has been revealed.
The General Court reverses its position taken four years ago, while the UN discusses tax policy in New York.
Discussion on amount B under the first part of the OECD's two-pronged approach to international tax reform is far from over, if the latest consultation is anything go by.
Pillar two might be top of mind for many multinational companies, but the huge variations between countries’ readiness means getting ahead of the game now, argues Russell Gammon, chief solutions officer at Tax Systems.
ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the looming battle between the UN and the OECD for dominance in global tax policy.