International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 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

Brazil: How tax authorities are interpreting cost sharing rules


Taxpayers should make sure they have agreed and documented how the costs and expenses of a cost sharing agreement in Brazil should be divided up between the parties involved.

The tax authorities have issued a Conflict Resolution Ruling (No 23/2013) disclosing their understanding of the possibility of centralising, in one sole company, the expenses of administrative support departments that benefit other companies of the same group for a later apportionment between them. This ruling further clarifies:

  • the requirements to be complied with for the deduction of such expenses for income tax purposes, and

  • the non-levy of the PIS and COFINS contributions (which are due on all the revenues received by the taxpayer of such contributions) on reimbursements received, as well as the possibility to use credits in case of taxpayers that are subject to the non-cumulative system for the payment of such contributions.

The importance of such a ruling is mainly because, historically, the tax authorities’ understanding was that the PIS and COFINS should be due by the company that received the reimbursement, though some decisions of the Administrative Council of Tax Appeals (the second level administrative court) favoured the taxpayers’ interests. These decisions were grounded on the fact that the recovery of the costs or expenses incurred on behalf of other companies is not an actual revenue of the company centralising the expenses and that the reimbursement represents a mere return of amounts advanced.

Even so, this ruling clarifies that, to deduct the amounts reimbursed to the centralising company for income tax purposes, as well as to avoid the PIS and COFINS taxation on the amount received as a reimbursement, the following conditions must be complied with:

(a) with regard to the shared costs and expenses, they must:

(i) be necessary, normal, usual and duly proved;

(ii) be shared based on reasonable and objective criteria that allocate to each company the corresponding expenses; such criteria shall be provided in a written agreement entered into among the involved parties;

(b) the centralising company must allocate as expense only the portion to which it is entitled and register the amounts to be reimbursed as credits to be recovered, in accordance with the apportionment criteria;

(c) the companies that benefit must allocate as expense just the portion that is allocated to them; and

(d) all the companies involved must have separate entries/accounts in relation to the costs and expenses shared.

As for the PIS and COFINS credits, the ruling clarifies that each company is only allowed to use the credits calculated based on its portion of the costs and expenses shared, provided that the charging of such costs and expenses allow identifying the expenditure items that trigger – for each legal entity that supports them – the right to credit.

In summary, in line with what was disclosed by the Conflict Resolution Ruling, it is important that taxpayers:

  • enter into a contract among the parties involved, which clearly states the criteria adopted and other required provisions; and

  • prepare and share with the interested parties the calculations and documents that supported the apportionment of the costs and expenses between them, to be presented to the tax authorities, if required.

Júlio de Oliveira ( and
Juliana Carla Alioti Passi (, members of Machado Associados, the principal correspondents for Brazil for the indirect tax channel of



more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.
The Asia-Pacific awards research cycle has now begun – don’t miss on this opportunity be recognised in 2023
An intense period of lobbying and persuasion is under way as the UN secretary-general’s report on the future of international tax cooperation begins to take shape. Ralph Cunningham reports.
Fresh details of the European Commission’s state aid case against Amazon emerge, while a pension fund is suing Amgen over its tax dispute with the Internal Revenue Service.
The OECD’s rules may be impossible for businesses to manage, according to tax experts from companies including Shell.