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: STJ confirms tax treaty benefits apply on cross-border services income

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-pwc.png
The two decisions provide clarity on the developing area of law

Alvaro Pereira and Mark Conomy of PwC Brazil take a look at a key STJ decision will assist companies carrying out cross-border transactions.

On May 19 2020, the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (STJ) granted Special Appeal No. 1.618.897 (RJ (2016/0208110-5)), confirming that income related to the provision of technical services by a French company should not be subject to withholding income tax, due to the application of the tax treaty signed between Brazil and France. 



By way of background, the Brazilian tax legislation provides that income derived by non-residents in relation to the provision of technical services and assistance should be subject to withholding income tax at a rate of 15% (increased to 25% where the beneficiary is located in a tax haven). 



In this case, the beneficiary of the payments was a French company, which did not have a permanent establishment in Brazil, which rendered technical services consisting of construction and maintenance of submarine cables to a Brazilian entity. 



The main issue revolved around the interpretation of the Brazil-France tax treaty and its interaction with the domestic Brazilian law. Further, it considered the application of the business profits provision (Article 7) and whether it should apply to prevent the application of withholding tax on income relating to the services provided. 



In summary, the decision established the following:

  • International treaties and conventions should prevail over domestic legislation, due to the principle of specificity, except for the application of the federal constitution;

  • The Brazil-France tax treaty provides that the profits of a company of a contracting state are only taxable in that same state (being France), unless the company carries out its activity in the other state (Brazil) by means of a permanent establishment – which was considered not to be the case; and

  • Although recognising Brazil is not a member of the OECD, it has adopted the OECD model in relation to the business profits article of its tax treaties. The term ‘profit’ should be interpreted not as real profit, but as operating profit, being the result of activities, principal or accessory that constitute the purpose of the legal entity, including, income paid as consideration for services rendered.


In light of above, it was concluded that the special appeal should be granted, confirming the applicant's right not to subject the payments to withholding income tax, due to application of the Brazil-France tax treaty.




The decision referred to, and is consistent with, another important decision of the STJ, REsp. 1.161.467/RS (judgment dated May 17 2012), which previously led to formal changes in the Brazilian tax authorities (RFB) public position on this issue. 



This earlier decision of the STJ resulted in the Attorney General of the National Treasury (PGFN) releasing Opinion PGFN/CAT. No. 2,363/2013 that recommended that its previous view set out in Opinion PGFN/CAT No. 776/2011 should be repealed. This opinion had formed the foundation for the public position taken by the RFB in Interpretative Declaratory Act COSIT No. 1/2000 (ADI 1/2000). As such, shortly following the release of Opinion PGFN/CAT No. 2,063/2013, the RFB released Interpretative Declaratory Act 5/2014 (ADI 5/2014) formally modifying its public position and revoking ADI 1/2000. 

The decision provides a helpful precedent for companies that make cross-border transactions involving services with jurisdictions that have entered into tax treaties with Brazil. However, careful consideration still needs to be given to the type of service (technical versus non-technical), as well as the particular tax treaty to determine whether the relevant protocol includes such services within another specific article permitting source taxation (e.g. the ‘royalty’ article).



Alvaro Pereira

T: +55 11 3674 6526

E: alvaro.pereira@pwc.com



Mark Conomy

T: +55 11 3674 2002

E: conomy.mark@pwc.com



more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The Brazilian government may be about to align the country’s unique system with OECD standards, but this is a long-awaited TP reform and success is uncertain.
Two months since EU political agreement on pillar two and few member states have made progress on new national laws, but the arrival of OECD technical guidance should quicken the pace. Ralph Cunningham reports.
It’s one of the great ironies of recent history that a populist Republican may have helped make international tax policy more progressive.
Lawmakers have up to 120 days to decide the future of Brazil’s unique transfer pricing rules, but many taxpayers are wary of radical change.
Shell reports profits of £32.2 billion, prompting calls for higher taxes on energy companies, while the IMF warns Australia to raise taxes to sustain public spending.
Governments now have the final OECD guidance on how to implement the 15% global minimum corporate tax rate.
The Indian company, which is contesting the bill, has a family connection to UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak – whose government has just been hit by a tax scandal.
Developments included calls for tax reform in Malaysia and the US, concerns about the level of the VAT threshold in the UK, Ukraine’s preparations for EU accession, and more.
A steady stream of countries has announced steps towards implementing pillar two, but Korea has got there first. Ralph Cunningham finds out what tax executives should do next.
The BEPS Monitoring Group has found a rare point of agreement with business bodies advocating an EU-wide one-stop-shop for compliance under BEFIT.