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

Brazilian Federal Supreme Court unravels the levy of taxes on software licensing

Sponsored by

logo.png
Transactions with software are deemed as services and will be taxed by the municipal service tax

Ricardo Marletti Debatin da Silveira and Rogério Gaspari Coelho of Machado Associados discuss a Supreme Court decision about the taxation of software licensing in Brazil.

On February 24 2021, the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court (STF) delivered a final decision related to the taxation of software in Brazil, defining that the transactions with software are deemed as services and therefore shall be taxed by the municipal service tax (ISS), with rates that vary from 2% to 5%. 

This judgment puts an end to a long discussion started in 1999, when Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI 1945) was filed against a law of the state of Mato Grosso that established the levy of the state-VAT (ICMS) on the download of software. Another Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI 5965) also challenged a similar matter, but related to the state of Minas Gerais, and was judged together with ADI 1945 by the STF.

Since the time software was sold by means of physical media and mainly after the internet allowed for its acquisition via download, the Brazilian states (competent to charge the ICMS) and municipalities (competent to charge the ISS) have been competing for tax revenues of an industry that has grown exponentially over time.

In a nutshell, states historically taxed the sale of software via ICMS, deeming it as goods due to the existence of the floppy disk and, afterwards, the compact disc. Not surprisingly, the states wanted to reaffirm this nature of 'goods’ when the physical media was no longer necessary. 

When this discussion arose more than 20 years ago, the STF decided that off-the-shelf software should be taxed by the ICMS and customised software by the ISS. However, things have significantly changed since then.

If, on the one hand, both states and cities tried to tax transactions with software, lots of taxpayers, on the other hand, claimed that neither the ICMS nor the ISS should be levied, as the amounts paid for software licensing were theoretically not related to the sale of goods or the rendering of services.  

In 2003, however, Supplementary Law 116/2003, which sets mandatory guidelines for the cities to charge the ISS, included “software licensing or the grant of right of use software” in the list of taxable services. 

For years, therefore, states and cities were rattling sabres and taxpayers were caught up in the midst of the quarrel.  

The STF eventually decided that transactions with software shall be taxed by the ISS. Nevertheless, as the prolonged discussion made several different factual situations arise for taxpayers, the court also decided to adjust the effects of the judgment. The court unusually established eight hypotheses of application of its decision as regards the past and the right to recover unduly paid taxes, as summarised below:

  1. Taxpayers that only paid the ICMS: the ICMS will not be refunded to taxpayers; municipalities must not charge the ISS regarding the same tax triggering events (to avoid double taxation);

  2. Taxpayers that only paid the ISS: the payments are legally valid, and states must not charge the ICMS regarding the same tax triggering events;

  3. Taxpayers that did not pay the ICMS nor the ISS: the ISS may be charged by the municipalities, since they respect the five-year statute of limitations applicable;

  4. Taxpayers that paid both the ICMS and ISS but did not file lawsuits requesting any refund. The refund of the ICMS will be granted (to avoid double taxation), and the ISS payments made will be deemed as valid;

  5. Ongoing lawsuits filed by taxpayers against states challenging the levy of the ICMS, including requirements for its refund: the STF’s understanding that the ISS is the tax levied shall prevail in such lawsuits, and the ICMS may be refunded;

  6. Ongoing lawsuits filed by states, including tax executions, aiming at collecting the ICMS: the STF’s understanding that the ISS is the tax levied shall prevail in such lawsuits, and the ICMS collection shall be dismissed;

  7. Ongoing lawsuits, including tax executions, filed by municipalities, aiming at collecting the ISS: the STF’s understanding that the ISS is the tax levied shall prevail in such lawsuits, except for the cases in which the ICMS was already paid (please see item 1 above); and

  8. Ongoing lawsuits filed by taxpayers against municipalities challenging the levy of the ISS. The STF’s understanding that the ISS is the tax levied shall prevail in such lawsuits.  

The effects of the STF’s judgment were hence adjusted by the court to try to balance outcomes and aftermaths for states, municipalities, and taxpayers.

Although belated, the definition that the ISS is the tax to be applied is positive for the software industry in Brazil, bringing tax and legal certainty for the taxpayers, tax savings depending on the concrete situation, and more simplicity for businesses in the IT sector. 

It is interesting to note that this decision may impact the understanding of the tax authorities about the levy of other taxes in transactions with software, such as the federal social contributions PIS-import and COFINS-import. 

Tax in a digital world is one of the main challenges everywhere on the planet. It is no different for Brazil.

Ricardo Marletti Debatin da Silveira

T: +55 11 3819 4855

E: rms@machadoassociados.com.br

Rogério Gaspari Coelho 

T: +55 11 3819 4855

E: rgc@machadoassociados.com.br

 

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

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.
The UK government is now committed to replacing the ‘super-deduction’ with a 100% capital allowances regime to offset the impact of the corporate tax rise to 25%.
Corporate tax is set to rise in the UK for the first time in decades, but the headline rate remains historically low despite what many observers think.
President Joe Biden’s nominee is set to be confirmed as IRS commissioner for a five-year term.
British companies are waiting to hear the details of what will replace the 130% ‘super-deduction’ next week, while Spain considers stopping a major infrastructure company moving to the Netherlands.
President Joe Biden wants to raise corporate tax and impose a higher stock buyback tax on US businesses, but his budget proposal faces insurmountable obstacles in Congress, writes Ralph Cunningham.
EY is still negotiating the terms of the plan to split its audit and consulting functions, but the future of tax services is reportedly a sticking point.
Country-by-country reporting is the best option for safe harbour provisions under the global anti-base erosion rules, according to tax directors at companies including Standard Chartered Bank and Pernod Ricard.