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's Supreme Court concludes discussion on the inclusion of ICMS in the PIS/COFINS taxable basis

Sponsored by

logo.png
Inclusion of ICMS in PIS/COFINS basis unconstitutional

Mauri Bornia and Gabriel Caldiron Rezende of Machado Associados discuss the final decision of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court, which settles the discussion about the inclusion of ICMS in the PIS/COFINS taxable basis.

The Full Bench of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court (STF) ruled, on March 15 2017, that the inclusion of the state VAT (ICMS) on the social contributions on gross revenue (PIS and COFINS) taxable basis is unconstitutional (Extraordinary Appeal 574706).

To this effect, the STF concluded that, although the ICMS is charged by the seller as part of the sales price, such amounts will be transferred to the state treasury department and, therefore, will not be added to the legal entity’s assets, thus not falling within the legal concept of gross revenue, which is the taxable basis for the PIS/COFINS.

Despite such decision on the merits, the Federal Revenue Service (RFB) did not peacefully accept the outcome and tried to reduce the financial impact of the decision. To this effect, it issued Internal Ruling 13/2018, in which it stated that the STF would have understood that the ICMS amount which does not compose the PIS/COFINS taxable basis is the ICMS monthly paid in cash after netting credits and debts.

Note that the ICMS is a non-cumulative tax, and thus the tax levied on taxed acquisitions may be booked as credit to offset against the debts calculated on the taxpayers taxed transactions. Accordingly, although the taxpayer indicates the ICMS debts in its invoices, it must net the monthly debts with the credits, so that:

  • If the credits surpass the debts, no ICMS payment in cash is due, and credit amounts in excess may be accrued for offsetting in the following months; or

  • If the debts surpass the credits, the taxpayer must pay in cash the surpassed debt amounts.

Based on this, Internal Ruling 13/2018 aims to reduce the financial impact of the STF decision, as only ICMS will be excluded from the PIS/COFINS taxable basis when there is ICMS to be paid in cash, which amount is smaller than the ICMS levied on each transaction (indicated in the invoice). 

Furthermore, if the taxpayer has more ICMS credits than debts (which is a common situation), there will be no amount to be excluded from the contributions’ taxable basis.

Although the STF was clear that the ICMS indicated in each invoice – regardless of the payment in cash after netting credits and debts – should not be included in the PIS/COFINS taxable basis, in October 2017, the Attorney General of the National Treasury (PGFN) filed a motion for clarification to discuss this matter, among others.

Finally, after four years of waiting, on March 13 2021, the STF judged the motion for clarification, establishing that:

  • The ICMS that is not included in the PIS/COFINS taxable basis is the one levied in each transaction, indicated in the relevant invoice, regardless of the credit and debt netting result; and

  • The decision on the merits is effective as of March 15 2017, except for lawsuits filed before this date. As a result, the recovery of PIS/COFINS paid in excess (with the ICMS in its taxable basis) regarding taxable events before March 15 2017, has been limited to taxpayers that file lawsuits before that date.

In view on this, the PGFN issued Opinion SEI 7698/2021/ME, accepting the outcome of the judgment, and provided the following guidance for the RFB to comply with the decision:

  • All procedures, routines and regulations relating to the collection of the PIS/COFINS as of March 15 2017, must be adjusted, in relation to all taxpayers, considering the unconstitutionality recognised by the STF;

  • Tax assessment notices should no longer be issued contrary to the aforementioned thesis established by the STF; and

  • The necessary measures must be taken for the purpose of reviewing the tax assessment notices and requests for recovery of payments made in excess at the administrative level, regardless of the filing of judicial measures.

Although, technically, this is not a necessary measure for the application of the STF decision, this guidance is especially relevant so that the RFB can begin to observe the decision's guidelines, including for the purposes of request for recovery of payments made in excess.

With this decision and the PGFN Opinion, the discussion at hand is finally concluded in favour of all taxpayers, who are legally able to not include the ICMS indicated in their invoices in the PIS/COFINS taxable basis from March 15 2017.

 

Mauri Bornia

Partner, Machado Associados

E: mb@machadoassociados.com.br

Gabriel Caldiron Rezende 

Partner, Machado Associados

E: gcr@machadoassociados.com.br

 

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

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.
Former PwC partner Peter-John Collins has been banned from serving as a tax agent in Australia, while Brazil reports its best-ever year of tax collection on record.