Uncertainty on Brazilian CFC regime remains after Supreme Court ruling

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Uncertainty on Brazilian CFC regime remains after Supreme Court ruling

braz.jpg

In 2001, Provisional Measure No. 2,158 was published in Brazil which allowed the Brazilian tax authorities to tax the profits of controlled and affiliated companies established in other countries, even if they had not been distributed to the Brazilian parent.

The measure generated an enormous backlash at the time, and a Direct Action for Declaration of Unconstitutionality was filed with the Federal Supreme Court seeking to repeal the provision.

brazilian-supreme-federal-court.jpg

The appellants claimed that the taxable event of income tax is the economic or legal availability of income and revenue of any nature, and the mere ascertainment of profits by the controlled or affiliated companies located abroad would not represent an equity accrual in Brazil that would justify the levy of such tax.

Although the Direct Action for Declaration of Unconstitutionality was filed 2001, the judgment was only recently concluded without the matter having been definitively resolved.

Ruling

In the judgment, three distinct opinions were stated by the justices of the Federal Supreme Court.

The reporting judge understood that the taxation of profits ascertained abroad would be constitutional in the case of controlled companies, and for affiliated companies such taxation would be unconstitutional. The judge grounded her understanding in the fact that, for affiliated companies – which do not have any control binding – the income and/or revenue would only be deemed acquired by the affiliated company in Brazil once the distribution of the revenue has been determined.

Four of the ten Federal Supreme Court justices voted in favour of the total constitutionality of the rule by affirming that the ordinary law – in such case, Provisional Measure No. 2.158 – should provide for the time of availability of the profits and revenue of any nature.

Subsequently, four other justices said the rule was entirely unconstitutional.

More recently, the tenth justice declared that the rule would only be deemed to be unconstitutional in the cases of taxation of profits ascertained by an affiliated company in a country not considered as a tax haven.

However, despite all of the anticipation generated in the last few years, the decision did not resolve all existing cases, more specifically the situations of affiliated companies in tax havens or controlled companies in non-tax havens.

This leads to the understanding that the matter regarding the taxation of profits abroad shall only be complete and definitively decided when a new case is submitted to trial before the Federal Supreme Court, despite the fact, as mentioned above, that this refers to a matter that has been awaiting resolution for more than a decade.

By principal Tax Disputes correspondent for Brazil, Glaucia Frascino (glaucia@mattosfilho.com.br) of Mattos Filho.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The UK’s Labour government has an unpopular prime minister, an unpopular chancellor and not a lot of good options as it prepares to deliver its autumn Budget
Awards
The firms picked up five major awards between them at a gala ceremony held at New York’s prestigious Metropolitan Club
The streaming company’s operating income was $400m below expectations following the dispute; in other news, the OECD has released updates for 25 TP country profiles
Software company Oracle has won the right to have its A$250m dispute with the ATO stayed, paving the way for a mutual agreement procedure
If the US doesn't participate in pillar two then global consensus on the project can’t be a reality, tax academic René Matteotti also suggests
If it gets pillar two right, India may be the ideal country that finds a balance between its global commitments and its national interests, Sameer Sharma argues
As World Tax unveils its much-anticipated rankings for 2026, we focus on EMEA’s top performers in the first of three regional analyses
Firms are spending serious money to expand their tax advisory practices internationally – this proves that the tax practice is no mere sideshow
The controversial deal would ‘preserve the gains achieved under pillar two’, the OECD said; in other news, HMRC outlined its approach to dealing with ‘harmful’ tax advisers
Former EY and Deloitte tax specialists will staff the new operation, which provides the firm with new offices in Tokyo and Osaka
Gift this article